Skip to main content

Due to a planned power outage on Wednesday, 10/27, between 8am-1pm PDT, some services may be impacted.

Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: Embracing Biblical, Historical ..."

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/| 


o • v 













{Astociate EdUora) 



(DepartmerU of Syatemaiic Theology) 


{Department of Minor Denominatumi) 


{Dqfpartmem of LUurgia and Religioui Orders) 


(Department of the Old TeMameni) 


{Department of the New TeMameni) 


(Department of Church History) 


(Department of Frowumdatijon and Typography) 

(Complete in ^vvelve iDoIumes 




ArtTdtt. L£vox AND 

Copyright, 1910, by 

Registered at Stationers' Hall, London, England 

Printed in (he United States €(f America 
PtMWied October, 1910 



(Editor-in-Chief. ) 

Professor of Church History, New York University. 


(Absociatb Editor.) 

New York, 

Forxnerly Professor of Biblical History and Lecturer on Comparative Religion, 

Bangor Theological Seminary. 



{DepartmerU of SyMtematie Theology.) 

Professor of Systematic Theology, Chicago Theological 



iDepartment of Minor DenominatioM.) 

Secretary of Executive Committee of the Western Section 
for the Fourth Ecumenical Methodist Conference. 


il>epartment of Liturgie» and Religiou9 Orders.) 
Rector of St. Ambrose's, New York City. 



{Department of the Old Testament.) 
Professor of Oriental Languages, University College, 



(Department of the New Testament.) 
Professor of the Literature and Interpretation of the New 
Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, Mass. 


(Department of Church History.) 

Professor of Church History, Southwestern Baptist 

Theological Seminary, Waco, Tex. 


(Department of Pronwnciaiijon and Typography.) 
Managing Editor of the Standard Diction art, etc.. 

New York City. 





Professor of Practical Theology, University of Marburg. 


Professor of Theology, University of Halle. 


Pastor of the Carver Memorial Church, Windermere, 



LL.D., Litt.D., 

Professor of New Testament Exegesis, Yale Divinity 



Professor of Church History, Reformed Theological 
Academy, Debreczin, Hungary. 


Bishop in Christiania. 


Consjstorial Councilor and First PreacbAr, Bairsuth. 



Professor of Systematic Theology, Chicago Theological 



Professor of Church History, University of KOnigsberg. 


BENZINGEB, Ph.D., Th.Lic, 

German Orientalist and Vice-Consul for Holland in 



Author at Arlesheim, near Basel 


Pastor at St. Michael's, Hamburg. 


Professor of Church History, University of Bonn. 


Professor of Church History, Independent School of 

Divinity, Paris. 



Professor of Church History, University of GOttingen. 


Retired Pastor, Stuttgart. 




Professor of History, University of Marburs. 



Professor of Theological Encyclopedia and Symbolics, 
Union Theological Seminary, New York. 


Chief Pastor of Jacobiklrche, Hamburg. 


Late Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Munich. 


Secretary of Executive Committee of the Western Section 
for the Fourth Ecumenical Methodist Conference. 

CASPABI, PI1.D., Th.D., 

University Preacher and Professor of Practical Theology, 

University of Erlangen. 


Pastor in Geneva. 


Professor of Church History in Meadville Theological 

School, Meadville, Pa. 


Consistorial Councilor, Ilfeld, Germany. 


Professor of the History of Christianity. University of 

Amsterdam, and Professor of Practical Theology, 

Mennonite Theological Seminary, Amsterdam. 



Late Pastor at Eddigehausen, Hanover. 



Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of 


SAinrEL MABTIN DEUT80H (t), Th.D., 

Late Professor of Church History, University of Berlin. 


Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of 



Late Professor of Theology, University of Berlin. 


Professor of Practical Theology, University of Halle. 


Rector of St. Ambrose's Church, New York City. 


Dubois, Ph.D., 

Professor of Economics and History, Atlanta University, 

Atlanta, Georgia. 

EMTL EOLI (t), Th.D., 
Late Professor of Church History, University of Zurich. 


Professor of Theology in Augsburg Seminary, Minneapolis, 


Professor of History, Olivet College, Michigan. 

Th.D., Dr.Jur., 

Professor of Ecclesiastical. Public, and German Law, 

University of Leipsic. 


Pastor of the Third Baptist Church, Berlin. 


Formerly Lecturer on Comparative Religion, Bangor 

Theological Seminary. Associate Editor of Thb 

New Schaff-Hebzoo Encyclopbdia. 


Assistant Librarian, University of Bonn. 


Honorary Professor of Geography. Technical High School, 
and Professor, MiUtary Academy, Munich. 



Late Professor of New Testament Exegesis. Ethics, and 
Practical Theology. Evangelical Theological 
Faculty. University of Tablngen. 

Th.D., D.D., LL.D., Dr. Jur., 

Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of 



Extraordinary Professor of Church History, University 

of Heidelberg. 


Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of 



Pastor in Strasburg. 


Pastor in Bern and Lecturer on New Testament Exegesis, 

University of Bern. 

HALL, D.D., LL.D., 

Protestant Episcopal Bishop of Vermont. 


Jur., M.D., 

General Director of the Royal Library, Berlin. 

D.D., LL.D., L.H.D., 

Emeritus Professor of Pastoral Theology, Union Theolog- 
ical Seminary. 

ALBEBT HAUOK, PI1.D., Th.D., Dr. Jur., 

Professor of Church History. University of Leipsic, 
Editor-in-Chief of the Hauck-fierzog ReaiencyklopMie. 


Professor and Director of the University Library, Giessen. 


Ph.D., Th.D., 

Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic. 

HAZ HEINZE (f), Ph.D., Th.D., 

Late Professor of Philosophy, University of Leipsic. 


Ph.D., Th.Lic., 

Pastor at Betheln, Hanover. 


Dr. Jur., 

Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Marburg. 

Ph.D., Th.D., 

Late Professor of Reformed Theology, University of 



City Pastor in EssUngen. 

Professor at Berlin and Director for the Publication of 
the Jdfonumento GermanuB Uistorica. 


Professor of German Language and Literature, University 

of Leipsic 



EBV8T HUEXPXL, PhJ)., Tli.I<io., 

Pastor at Biamstedt, Holstein, Qennany. 


Pastor Emeritus at Halle. 


Privat-dooent for Old Testament Exegesis, University of 



HAXnSEK (t), ThJ)., 

I^te Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of 



Professor of Dogmatics, University of Halle. 

Fh.D., TI1.D., 

Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Halle. 


Supreme Oonsistorial Councilor, Provost of St. Peter's, 

Berlin, and Honorary Professor, 

university of Berlin. 

XONBAD KE88LSB (f), Fh.D.y 

Late Professor of Semitic Languages, University of 



Minister at SchalThausen, Switzerland. 

BX7D0LF KITTEL, Fli«D., Th.D., 

Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Leipsic. 



Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Kiel. 


Late Librarian in Tabingen University Library. 

J08EFH XKAFF (f), 

Late Dean in Stuttgart. 


Professor of Church History, University of Zurich. 


FhJ>., TI1.D., 

Late Privy Councilor in Cannstadt, formerly Professor of 
Theology, University of Giessen. 

JXJLin8 K0E8TLIK (f), FhJ)., ThJ)., 


Late Professor of Theology, University of Halle. 

XOLDE, Fh.D., Th.D., 

Professor of Church History, University of Erlangen. 


F1I.D., Th.D., 

Professor of Church History, University of Giessen. 


President of the Reformed Preachers* Seminary in Basel- 

Fh.D., Th.D., 

Professor of Practical Theology, University of Greifswald. 


aty Pastor, Leonberg, WOrttemberg. 


Plainfleld, New Jersey. 



Late Director of the Royal Library, Munich. 


Late Provincial Councilor for Schools, Hanover, Germany. 


Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Heidel- 


Pastor at Buch, Canton of Zurich, Switzerland. 


Late Studienrektor. Munich. 


Professor of Church History. University of Halle. 


Presbyterian Pastor, New York City. 


Late Professor of Hebrew, Exegesis, Homiletics. and 
Ethics, Lutheran Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. 

OTTO MEJEB (f), PI1.D., TI1.D., 

Late President of the Consistory, Hanover. 


Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Hanover. 

Ph.D., Th.D., 

Professor of History. University of Zurich. 


Professor of Church History, University of Marburg. 


Pastor at Zaandam, North Holland. 



Professor of Reformed Theology, University of Erlangen. 


Inspector of Schools, Leipsic 


Extraordinary Professor of Christian Archeology, Univer- 
sity of Berlin. 


Professor of the Literature and Interpretation of the New 
Testament, Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, 



Professor of Church History, Southwestern Baptist Theo- 
logical Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas. 


Supreme Consistorial Councilor, Speyer, Bavaria. 



Late Bishop of Aarhus, Denmark. 

HITZSOH (t), Th.D., 

Late Professor of Theology, University of Kiel. 


Professor of Theology in the Academy of the New Church, 

Bryn Athyn, Pa. 


Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and History of 
Religion, University of Basel. 


Pastor of St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, Paris. 


Professor of Ancient History, Uiftversity of Munich. 


Pastor at Hirschhom-on-the-Neckar, Germany. 




Extraordinary Professor of Systematic Theology, Univer- 
sity of Marburg. 

lESUSrST BANKE (f), Th.D., 

Late Professor of Theology at Marburg. 


Professor of Practical Theology and University Preacher, 

University of Leipsic. 


Pastor at Birmensdorf and Lecturer at the Univeraity 

of Zurich. 


Pastor at Oberholzheim, Wtlrtteraberg. 

CABL 80HMIBT (t)» Th.D., 

Late Professor of Theology, University of Strasburg. 

Ph.D., D.D.y 

Late Pastor of the Savoy Church, London. 


Ph.D., TI1.D., 

Late Librarian and Professor of Theology. University of 




Professor of Church History and Christian Archeology, 
University of Greifswald. 

A. 8CHUXANK (t), 

Late Gymnasial Professor in AArau. 


Pastor at Cunow-an-der-Strasse, Pomerania. 


Late Professor of Theology in Zurich. 


Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Berlin. 

EMIL 8EBXINO, I>r.Jiir., 

Professor of Ecclesiastical and CommerciAl Law, Univer- 
sity of Erlangen. 


Missionary, Urumia, Persia. 


P1l.D., Tli.D.y 

Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Bonn. 

EDUABD 8IM0N8, Th.D., 

Extraordinary Professor of Practical Theology, University 

of Berlin. 

J08EPH FIELDINa 8]aTH, Jr., 

Assistant Historian of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter 

Day Saints. 

DOB SPAETH (t), D.D., LL.D., 

Late Professor in the Lutheran Theological Seminary, 

Mt. Airy, Philadelphia. 


Professor of Egyptology, University of Leipsic. 


Professor of German Language and Literature, University 

of Erlangen. 



Extraordinanr Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and 
Semitic Languages, University of Berlin. 


Professor of Ecclesiastical Law, University of Bonn. 


Professor of Systematic Theology in Gdttingen. 


Secretary of the American Peace Society, Boston. 

PAUL T80HA0KEBT, Ph.D., Th.D., 

Professor of Church History, University of GOttingen. 

P. M. T80HIBNEB (f), Ph.D., 
Late of Leipsic, Germany. 


X7HLH0BN (f), ThJ>., 

Late Abbot of Lokkum, Germany. 


Professor of Philosophy and Biblical Literature, Cornell 

College, Iowa. 


Professor of Church History and Christian Archaeology, 

University of Utrecht. 


Gymnasial Rector, Nuremberg. 

WILHELM VOLOK (f), Ph.D., ThJ>., 

Late Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of 



Pastor in Paris, France. 

WIEQAND, Ph.D., Th.D., 

Professor of Church History, University of Greifswald. 


General Secretary of the Laymen's Missionary Movement. 


Retired Public Schoolmaster, London. 


Formerly Honorary Secretary for the United States of the 
Palestine Exploration Fund. 


Richards Professor of Christian Theology, Auburn Theo- 
logical Seminary, Auburn, New York. 


Th.D., Litt.D., 

Professor of New Testament Exegesis and Introduction, 

University of Erlangen. 


Pastor in Oranienbaum, Germany. 

OTTO ZOEOKLEB (f), Ph.D., Th.D., 

Late Professor of Church History and Apologetics, Univer- 
sity of Greifswald. 


The following list of books is supplementary to the bibliographies given at the end of the articles 
contained in vob. I.-VIII., and brings the literature down to July, 1910. In this list each title entry 
is printed in capital letters. It is to be noted that, throughout the work, in the articles as a rule only 
first editions are given. In the bibliographies the aim is to give either the best or the latest edition, and 
in case the ho6k is published both in America and in some other country, the American place of issue 
is usually given the preference. 

Atrica: G. Simon, Islam und Christenium im 
Kampf um die Eroberung der animiatischen 
Heidenwdt, Berlin, 1910. 

Axed, C. F.: The Lord's Prayer; its Meaning and 
Message for To-day, New York, 1910. 

Alexandria: A. M. de Zogheb, Etudes sur Vann 
cienne Alexandrie, Paris, 1909. 

AxDREWES, L.: D. MacLeane, Lancelot Andrewes 
and the Reaction, London, 1910. 

Apocrypha, O. T.: Die Eera-Apokalypse (IV Ezra), 
part 1, Die Ueberlieferung, ed. B. Violet, 
Leipsic, 1910. 

Apologetics: K. Gutberlet, Gott und die Schdp- 
fung. BegrHndung und Apologie der chrisui- 
chen Wdtauffcissung, Regensbuig, 1910. 

A. C. Headlam, Histinry, Authority, and The- 
ology, Milwaukee, 1910. 

P. ri. Muir, Modern Substitutes for Christian^ 

t, London, 1910. 
Schenck, Christian Evidences and Ethics, 
New York, 1910. 

B. Scott, The Contents and Teachings of the 
Catacombs at Rome. A Vindication of pure 
and primitive Christianity and an Exposure 
of the Corruptions of Romanism: Derived 
from the sepidchral Remains of the early 
Christians, London, 1910. 

G. Thomas, Christianity in Christ, vol. iv. of 

Anglican Church Handbooks, London, 1910. 
Note also Ballard, under Atheism, below. 

Aram: S. Schiffer, Die Aramder. Historischrgeo- 
graphische Untersuchungen, Leipsic, 1910. 

Aristotle: H. Meyer, Der Entwicklungsgedanke 
6et Aristotdes, Bonn, 1909. 

C. Werner, Aristote et Videalisme platonicien, 
Paris, 1910. 

Abstria: F. Delitzsch, Asurbanipal und die assyri- 

sche KuUur seiner Zeit, Leipsic, 1910. 
P. Dharme, La Religion assyro-babylonienne, 

London, 1910. 
L. W. King, History of Babylonia and Assyria 

from Prehistoric Times to the Persian Con- 

quest, 3 vols., London, 1909. 
V. Scheil and J. E. Gautier, Annates de Tvkulr 

tininip II., roi d'Assyrie 889-S84, Paris, 

W. H. Ward, The Seal Cylinders of Western 

Asia, Washington, D. C, 1910. 

Atheism: F. Ballard, The Mirades of Unbelief, 
Edinburgh, 1910. 
N. J. Laforet, Causes and Cure of Unbelief; 
ed. by Cardinal Oibbons, unth a chapter by 
the Rev. P. J. Ryan, PhUadelphia, 1910. 

ATONEBiENT: J. B. Oldroyd, The Doctrine of the 
Atonement, chiefly as set forth in the EpisUe 
to the Hebrews, London, 1910. 
M. Scott, The Atonement, London, 1910. 

Babylonia: P. Dharme, see above, Assyria. 

L. W. King, A History of Sumer and Akkad: 
an Account of the early Races of Babylonia 
from prehistoric Tiines to the FoundaHon of 
the Babylonian Monarchy, London, 1910; 
see also above, Assyria. 

Baptists: M. T. Whitley, ed.. Minutes of the Gen^ 
eral Assembly of the General Baptist Churches 
in England, vnth kindred Records, London, 

Bardesanes: F. Haase, Zur bardesanischen Gnosis, 
Potsdam, 1910. 

Beet, J. A. : Holiness, Symbolic and Real: a Bible 
Study, London, 1910. 

Belgium: T. F. Bumpus, The Cathedrals and 
Churches of Belgium, New York, 1910. 

Bible Text: E. Konig, Hebrdisches und aramd- 
isches W&rterbuSi zum Alten Testament, 
Leipsic, 1910. 
Agnes Smith Lewis, Codex dimaci rescriptus. 
Fragments of sixth Century Palestinian Suriac 
Texts of the Gospels, of the Ads of the Apos- 
tles and of St. PauTs Epistles. Also Frag- 
ments of an early Palestinian Lectionary of 
the Old Testament, etc., Cambridge, 1909. 

Bible Versions: O. Procksch, Studien zur Ge- 
schichte der Septuaginta: Die Propheten, 
L^psic, 1910. 
J. Wright, Grammar of the Gothic Language 
and the Gospel of St. Mark. Selections Jfrom 
the other Gospels and Timothy with Notes 
and Glossary, London, 1910. 

Biblical Criticism: R. Kittel, Die alttestament- 
liche Wissenschaft in ihren wichOgsten Ergeb- 
nissen mit BerUcksichtigung des Rdigumsun^ 
terrichts, Leipsic, 1910. 
W. B. Riley, The Finality of the Higher Critic 
cism, or the Theory of Evolution and false 
Theology, Minneapolis, 1910. 


BiBUCAL Theoloot: J. Adams, Israd'a Ideal; or, 
Studies in Old TeeiamerU TheoU)^, New 
York, 1910. 
A. B. D. Alexander, The Etkica of St Paul, 

Glasgow, 1910. 
G. R. Berry, The Old TeeUmerd among the 
Semitic RettgionSy Philadelphia, 1910. 

C. Clemen, Die Entwiddung der chrisUichen 
Religion innerhalb dee Neuen Teetamente, 
Ldpsic, 1908. 

P. Feine, Theologie dee Neuen Testamente, 
Leipdc, 1910. 

U. Z. Rule, Old Testament InstituHans: their 
Origin and Development, London, 1910. 

A. J. Tait, Christ and the Nations, An Exam- 
ination of Old and New Testament Teaching, 
London. 1910. 

D. Westpnal, T?ie Law and the Prophets; or, 
the Revelation of Jehovah in Hebrew History 
from the Earliest Times to the Capture of 
Jerusalem by Titus, New York, 1910. 

Brahmanibm: L. de La ViUte Poussin, Notions sur 
les religions de I'Inde, Le Brahmanisme, 
Paris, 1910. 

S. Tattvabhusan, T?ie Philosophy of Brahmanr 
ism. Expounded with Reference to its His- 
tory, London, 1910. 

M. Walleser, Der dltere Veddnta GeschichU. 
Kritik una Lehre, Heidelberg, 1910. 

Brazil: S.^R. Gammon, The Evangdical Inr>asion 
of Brazil; or, a half Century of Evangdical 
Missions in the Land of the Southern Cross, 
Richmond, Va., 1910. 

Buddhism : Psalms of the Early Buddhists, I. Psalms 
of the Sisters, by BIrs. R. Davids, London, 
J. W. Sinha, The Singularity of Buddhism, 
London, 1910. 

Canon of the Bible: L. Dennerfeld, Der alttestor 
meniUche Kanon der anOochenischen Kirche, 
Evaristus Radus, Die Menschenopfer der 
alien Hdfrder urd der benachbarten Vdlker, 
in Biblisc?ie Studien, Freiburg, 1910. 

Cabthage, Synods of: On the chronology consult 
the Fr. tiunsl. of Hefele's ConcUiengeschichte, 
i. 1088-1124, Paris, 1907. 
H. von Soden, Sententia LXXXVII Epis- 
coporum: Das ProtokoU der Synods von 
Karthago am 1. September, 266, Gdttingen, 

Cabtwright, p.: P. M. Walters, Peter Cartwright, 
New York, 1910. 

Catharinub, a.: J. Schweiser, Ambrosius Cathar- 
inus PolUus (1484-1553), ein Theoloae des 
RefomuUionszeitalters, Sein Leben una seine 
Schriften, MOnster, 1910. 

Celibact: Note should be made of the dissertar 
tion on conciliar legislation concerning celi- 
bacy in the Fr. tra^. of Hefele's Cofwilien- 
geschichie, ii. 1320-48, Paris, 1908. 

CEi/nc Church: D. Davies, The Ancient Celtic 
Church of Wales: Where isUf London, 1910. 

Challoner, R.: E. H. Burton, The Life and Times 
^ Bishop Challoner, 1691-1781, 2 vob., 
London, 1910. 

China: W. Grube, Religion und Kulius der Chine- 
sen, Leipsic, 1910. 

CHBiBTOLOGt: W. Sandav, Christologies Ancient 
and Modem, Oxford, 1910. 
G. S. Streatfield, The Incarnation, London, 

Chronicles, Books of: A. A. Madsen and E. L. 
Curtis, Chronicles, in The International 
Critical Commentary, New York, 1910. 

Chrtbostom: J. A. Nairn, The De sacerdotia of St, 
John Chrysosiom, London, 1910. 

Church: J. C. Barry, Ideals and Principles of 
Church Reform, Edinburgh, 1910. 
J. Denney, The Church and the Kingdom, 
London, 1910. 

Church History: E. de Fave, £tude swr les ori- 
gines des iglises de I Age apostolique, Paris, 
W. S. Hooton, Turning Points in the Primitive 

Church, London, 1910. 
P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 
v., part 2, The Middle Ages, from Boniface 
VIII,, ie94f to the Protestant Reformation, 
1517, by D. S. Schaflf, New York, 1910. 

Clare, St.: The Life of St. Clare Ascribed to Fr. 
Thomas of Celano of the Order of Friars 
Minor, A.D, 1255-61; transl, and ed, from 
the earliest MSS, by Fr, Paschal Robinson 
of the same Order; with an Appendix con- 
taining the Rule of St, Clare, Pniladedphia, 

Clbicbn, C. C: QueUenbuch tur praktischen The- 
ologie, part 1, QueUen eur Lehre vom Oottes- 
dienst {Liturgik), part 2, QueUen eur Lehre 
vom Religionsunterrichi, Giessen, 1910. 

Clement of Alexandria: Stromata VII., und 
VIII. — Excerpta ex Theodoto Eclogue pro- 
pheHeod—Quis dives salvetur-Fra^mente, Mit 
drei Handschriftenproben in Ltchtdruck, ed. 
O. St&hlin, Leipsic, 1910. 

Coke, T.: F. B. Upham, Thomas Coke, New York, 

Common Prater, Book of: The First and Second 
Prayer Books ofKinq Edward, London, 1910. 
The Prayer Book of Queen Elizabeth, 1559, to 
which are appended some occasional Forms of 
Prayer, issued in her Reign, with an histor- 
ical Introduction, by E. Benham, Edinburgh, 

Communism: G. J. Holyoke, The History of Coop- 
eration, London, 1910. 

Comparative Reugion: J. Dechelette, Le Cvlte 
du soleil aux temps prihistoriques, Paris, 1910. 

J. G. Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy; a Trea- 
tise on certain early Forms of Superstition 
and Society, New York, 1910. 

J. Kinff, The Development of Religion; a Study 
in AfUhropology and Social Psychology, New 
York, 1910. 

J. C. Lawson, Modem Greek Folklore and An- 
dent Greek Religion, Cambrid^, 1910. 

J. Wameck, Die Religion der Batak, Leipsic, 

Concordances: S. Hemer, Verbesserungen zu 
Manddkems Grosser Konkordam, Lund, 
1910 (cf. the discussion in vol. iii., p. 206, of 
this work). 

Congregational Union Lecture: P. T. Forsyth, 
The Person and Place of Jesus Christ, Bos- 
ton, 1910. 

Conqbeqationalists: W. E. Barton, A Congre- 
gational Manual; Theory and Practice, for 
the Use cf Ministers, Churches, and deliberative 
Assemblies governed by Congregational Usage, 
Oak Park, 111., 1910. 
C. S. Nash, Congregational Administration, 
Boston, 1910. 


Gbeation: M. Sabiston, The Biblieal Account of 
the Creation; shown to he in Accordance untk 
the Discooeries of Science, New York, 1909. 
C. M. Waleh, The Doctrine 0/ Creation, London, 

CoMTBEABE, F. C.i The Ring of Pope Xyetue, to- 
gether with the Prolooue of Rvjinta, now first 
rendered into English with an Historical and 
Critical Commentary, London, 1910. 

Curia: J. Simier, La Curie romaine. Notes hia- 
torigues et canonigues, d*aprks la constitur 
tion ** SapienU consiUo," et les autres docur 
ments porUifieaux, Paris, 1910. 

Ctfbian: H. Koch, Cyprian vnd der rOmische 
Primal. Einehirchenr und dogmengeschicht- 
Hche StudU, Leipdc, 1910. 

Ctbil of Alexandria: A. Struckmann, Die Evr 
charistidehre des heiHgen CyriU von Alex- 
andrien, Paderbom, 1910. 

Dante: W. M. Roesetti, Dante and Lis Convito. 
A Study with Translations, London, 1910. 

DsNNEY, J.: See above. Church. 

Doctrine, Hibtort of: C. Guignebert, L* Evolu- 
tion des dogmes, Paris, 1910. 
O. Ritschl, Dogmengeschichte des Protestantio- 
mus, Leipdc, 1908. 

Druidb: G. Coffey, Intercourse of Gaul with Ireland 
Before the First Century, London, 1910. 

Eabter: The Book of Easter, irith an Introduction 
by W. C. Doane, New York, 1910. 

EAfirTEBN Chxtrch: Margaret G. Dampier, Organr 
isation of the Orthodox Eastern Churches, 
London, 1910. 

EksHABDT, M.: M sister Edchardt's Sermons, Eng. 
transl. by C. Field, London, 1910. 

EGfTPr: E. A. W. Budge, The Liturgy of Funerary 

(Offerings, London, 1910; idem. The Book of 

the Opening of the Mouth, 2 vols., London, 

y. Ermoni, La Religion de VEgypte ancienne, 

Paris. 1910. 
J. liebueu, Recherches sur Vhtstoire et la civil- 

isation de Vancisnne Bgypte, Leipsic, 1910; 

idem, Hieroglyphisches l/amenwMerbuch, 

Leipsic, 1910. 

Egtptian Exploration Fund: Oxyrhynchos Pa- 
vyri, part VII., ed. A. S. Hunt, with Trans- 
lations and Notes, London, 1910. 

Elam: G. HOsing, Die Sprache Elams, Breslau, 

England, Chxtrch of: C. Bastide, L*AngUcanisme, 
I'iglise d'Angleterre, son histoire et son isuvre, 
la diffusion de Vanglicanisme, Saint Blaise, 

N. N. Bond, The Earnest Churchman, being 
Enqland*s Reply to the Pretensions of Rome 
and Dissent, London, 1910. 

J. H. Bum, The Struggle vnth Puritanism, 
London, 1910. 

C. S. Carter, The English Church in the Seven- 
teenth Century, London, 1910. 

W. L. P. Cox, The Church of England as Catho- 
lic and Rearmed: an Exposition and an 
Eirenicon, London, 1910. 

A. C. Headlam, History, Authority, and The- 

ology, London, 1910. 
.. Plui 

A. Plimuner, The Church of England . in the 
Eighteenth Century, London, 1910. 

R. G. Usher, The Reconstruction of the English 
Church, New York, 1910. 

Enuqhtbnmbnt: J. G. Hibben, T?ie Philosophy of 
the Enlightenment, New York, 1910. 

Erasmus: Erasmus Desiderius, Opus epistolarum 
Desiderii Erasmi Roterdami; denuo recof- 
nitum et auctum per P, S, Allen, vol. ii., 
1514-17, London and New York, 1910. 

Ethics: E. DQrr, OrundsUge der Ethik, Heidelberg, 
B. Rand, The Classical Moralists. Sdections 
from the Great Authors in the History of 
Ethics from Socrates to Martineau, London, 

Eucharist: M. Goguel, L'Eucharistie des origines 
A Justin Martyr, Paris, 1910. 

A. Struckmann, Die Eucharistielehre des hcUi- 
gen CyriU von Alexandrien, Paderbom, 1910. 

EusEBius of CiBSAREA: EpistuLfB. Pars I., Epis- 
tula L-LXX., ed. I. Hilberg, Vienna and 
Leipsic, 1910. 

EuTTCHius OF Alexandria: Annales, in CSCO, 
vol. vii., part 2, 1909. 

Evolution: F. J. Hall, Evolution and the Fall, 
New York, 1910. 

Exegesis: W. H. K. Soames, Old Theology, An 
Attempt to Expound some of the Dimcult or 
Obscure, or Misunderstood Texts, Passages, 
and Expressions in the New Testament, Lon- 
don, 1910. 

FiN^LON: J. Lemaitre, Ftn£Um, Paris, 1910. 

Fowler, C. H.: Patriotic Orations; prepared for 
PtMieation byhis Son C. H, Fowler, Intro- 
duction by J. W. HiU, New York, 1910. 

Francis, Saint, of Assibi: A. Bailly, The Divine 
Minstrels; a Narrative of the Life of St, 
Francis of Assisi with his Companions, New 
York, 1910. 

B. Berenson, A Sienese Painter of the Francis- 
can Legend, New York, 1910 (the painter is 
Stefano Sassetta, and his subject was St. 

Freemasons: Fratemalism and the Church: by a 
Devotee to both, Dowagiac, Mich., 1910. 

French Revolution: P. Pisani, U6glise de Paris 
et la revolution, Paris, 1909. 

Frt, E.: Georgina K. Lewis, Elizabeth Fry, Lon- 
don, 1910. 

George, St.: C. S. Hulst, St, Oeorge ofCappadoda 
in Legend and History, London, 1910. 

Gnosticism: F. Haase, see above, imder Barde- 


Gospel and Gospels: B. Bonkamp, Zur Evango- 
lienfrage. Monster, 1910. 
V. H. Stanton, The Oospels as Historical Docu- 
ments, part 2, The Synoptic Gospds, London, 

Gregory VII.: A. H. Mathew, The Life and Times of 
Hildebrand, Pope Oregory VII,, London, 1910. 

Hall, A. C. A. : The Apostolic Ministry; a Charae 
. . . with Notes and Appendices, New York, 

Harmonies: J. M. Thompson, The Synoptic Oos- 
pels arranged in Parallel Columns, New York, 

TT^Am.fif^ A. C: See above, England, Church of. 

Hebrews, Epistle to: B. Weiss, Der Hebrder- 
briiff in seitgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung, Leip- 
sic, 1910. 
E. C. Wickham, The Epistle to the Hebrews. 
With Introduction and Notes, London, 1910. 



Hegel: McTaggarti A Commentary on Hegel*8 
LogiCt London, 1910. 

Hellenism: A. Deissmann, Die Urgeechiehie dee 
Christentume im Lichte der Sprac^^orschung, 
Tubingen, 1910. 

Henson, H. H.: Westminster Sermons^ London, 

Herbert, C: E. S. Buchanan, George Herbert^ 
Melodist {1693-1633), London, 1910. 

Hexateuch: B. D. Erdmans, AUtestamenUiche 

Sttutien, III., Das Buck Exodus, Giessen, 

A. F. Puukko, Das Deuieronomium, Leipsic, 

J. Skinner, Genesis, in the International Critr 

ical Commentary, New York, 1910. 

Holiness: See above. Beet, J. A. 

Holy Spirit: E. B. Spumn, The Work and Fruits 
of the Holy Spirit, London, 1910. 

Htmnoloot: G. M. Dreves, Ein Jahrtatisend 
lateinischer Hymnenbildung, Eine BlUtenlese 
aus den Analecta Hymnica, Leipsic, 1910. 

Idealism: H. Jones, Idealism as a Practical Creed, 
Glasgow, 1910. 
A. Upward, The New World, New York, 1910. 

Immortality: G. Bj&rklund, Death and Resurrec- 
tion from the Point of View of the Cell Theory, 
Chicago, 1910. 

A. M. Crane, A Search after Ultimate Truth; 
the divine Perfection inherent in Man and in 
cdl Creation, Boston, 1910. 

H. Frank, Modem lAght on Immortality, Lon- 
don, 1910. 

G. Heinzehnann, Der Begriff der Sede und die 
Idee der Unsterblichkeit bei Wi^idm Wundt, 
Tubingen, 1910. 

J. B. Hunt, Existence after Death, Applied by 
Science, London, 1910. 

India: H. Oldenbuig, Aits dem aUen Indien. Drei 
Aufsdtze itber den Buddhismus Altindische 
Dichtung und Geschichtschreibung, Berlin, 

Indians of North America, Missions to the: 
T. J. Campbell, Pioneer Priests of North 
America, 1642-1710, vols., i.-ii.. New York, 
Note also Hughes, un *er Jesuits, below. 

Infallibility: J. A. Beckett, Papal Infallibility 
in the Light of Holy Scripture ana History, 
London, 1910. 

Inspiration: J. Orr, Revelation and Inspiration, 
London and New York, 1910. 

Ireland: D. A. Chart, Ireland, from the Union to 
Catholic Emancipation, 1800-29, London, 
G. B. O'Connor, Stuart Ireland: Catholic and 

Puritan, Dublin, 1910. 
C. Plummer, VitcR sanctorum HibemicB partim 
hactenus ineditte adfvdem codicum manuscrip- 
torum recognovit prolegomenis notis indicibus 
instruxit, 2 vols.. New York, 1910. 

Isaiah: Isaiah I.-XXXIX,, ed. C. H. Thomson 
and J. Skinner, London, 1910. 

Israel, History of: A. T. Abemethy, The Jew a 
Negro: being a Study of the Jewish Ancestry 
from an impartial Standpoint, Moravian 
Falls, N. C, 1910. 
A. Albrecht, Israd und Aegypten, Die poU- 
tischen Beeiehungen der Kdnxge wm Israel und 
Juda zu den Pharaonen, Leipsic, 1910. 

Israel, History of: M. Harris, Modem Jewish 

History from the Renaissance to the Russian 

Exodus, New York, 1910. 
C. F. Lehman-Haupt, /«raa2. Seine Geschichte 

im Rahmen der WdtgeschidUe, Tubingen, 

A. Lewin, Geschichte der badischen Juden seit 

der Regierung Karl Friedrichs (1738-1900), 

Carlsruhe, 1909. 
J. B. Shearer, Hebrew Institutions, Social and 

Civil, Richmond, Va., 1910. 
L. Simon, Aspects of the Hebrew Genius. A 

Volume of Essays on Jewish Literature and 

Thought, London, 1910. 
R. Weill, Le S^our des Israilites au dSsert et 

le Sinai dans la relation primitive, Vivoluiion 

du texte biblique et la tradition christiano- 

modeme, Paris, 1910. 

Ives, L. S.: M. de L. Haywood, Lives of the Bishops 
of North Carolina from the Establishment of 
the Episcopate in that State down to the Di- 
vision of the Diocese, Raleigh, N. C, 1910. 

Jessup, H. H.: Fifty-three years in Syria, 2 vols.. 
New York, 1910. 

Jesuits: T. A. Hiighes, History of the Society of 

Jesus in North America, Documents: vol. i. pt. 

2: nos, 141-224, 1605-1838, Cleveland, 1910. 

H. Stoeckius, Forschungen zux Lebensordnung 

der GeseUschaft Jesu im 16 Jahrhundert, I., 

OrdensangehOrige und Exteme, Mimich, 1910. 

Note also Campbell, under Indians of North 

America, above. 

Jesus Christ: A. Schweitzer, The Quest for the 
Historical Jesus; a critical Study of its Proa- 
ress from Reimarus to Wrede, New York, 

W. B. Selbie, Aspects of Christ, London, 1910. 

H. L. Strack, Jesus, die Hdretiker und die 
Christen nach den dlteren jUdischen Angaben, 
Leipsic, 1910. 

Jesus Christ, Pictures and Images of: E. von 
DobschUtz, Christusbilder. Untersuchungen 
zur chrisUichen Legende, Leipsic, 1910. 

Jesus Christ, Threefold Office of: N. Dimock, 
Our One Priest on High; or the Present Sacer- 
dotal Function of Christ in Heaven; what it is 
not and what it is. New York, 1910. 

Joel: A. C. Gaebelein, The Prophet Joel; an Ex- 
position, New York, 1910. 

John the Apostle: J. Culross, John, Whom Jesus 

Loved, London, 1910. 
M. Goguel, Les Sources du r^cit johannigue de 

la passion, Paris, 1910. 
M. Lepin, La Valeur historique du quatribme 

&oangile, 2 vols., Paris, 1910. 

Julius Africanus, Sextus: W. Reichardt, Die 
Brief e des Sextus Julius Africanus an Aris- 
tides und Origines, in TU, xxxiv. 3, Leipsic, 

Kingdom of God: J. Denney, The Church and 
the Kingdom, London, 1910. 

Kittel, R.: Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 2 Band, 
Das VoUc in Kanaan, 2d ed.. Gotha, 1909; 
idem. Die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft in 
ihren unchtigsten Ergebnissen mil BerUck- 
sichtigung des Rdigionsunterrichts darge- 
steUt, Leipsic, 1910. 

Lewis, A. H.: Spiritual Sabbathiem, Plainfield, 
N. J., 1910. 

Lombards: C. Blasel, Die WandergUge der Lango- 
barden, Breslau, 1909. 



Lord's Prater: See above, Aksd, C. F. 

Lord's Supper: N. Dimock, The Doctrine of the 
Lord's Supper; toith an Appendix on the 
AvgmerUation Theory, New 'York, 1910. 

Los VON Rom: A. Robertson, The Papal Conquest: 
Italy's Warning " Wake up John BvU," 
London, 1910. 

McChetne, R. M.: J. C. Smith, Robert Murray 
McCheyney London, 1910. 

McLaren, A. : PhUippians, ColossianSf I and II 
Thessalonians, and I Timothy, London, 1910. 

Magic: J. Cumbarieu, La Musique et la magie. 
Etude 8ur les origines poputaire de Vart mur 
sical, son influence et sa fonction dans les 
socUtUs, Pans, 1909. 

Mani, Manicheans: A. von Le Cog, Exploration 
archiologique d Tour/an, Paris, 1910. 

Marcus Aureuus: F. W. Bussell, Marcus Aurdius 
and the Later Stoics, Edinburgh, 1910. 

Mart: CSCO, Scriptores atkiomci, series I., vol. 
VII. Apocrypha de B. Maria virgine, ed. M. 
Chaine, Leipsic, 1909. 

Medo-Persia: F. H. Weissbach, Die KeUinsckriften 
der Ach&meniden und Sdeukiden, Leipsic, 

Melanchthon: N. MOller, PkUipp Mdanchihons 
Idzbe Lebenstaae, Heimganf und Bestattung 
nach den gleichzeiiigen Benchten der Witten- 
berger Pro/essoren, 1910. 

Methodists: Wesley's Veterans: Lives of Early 
Methodist Preachers Told by themselves, 2 
vols., London, 1910. 

Meter, F. B.: At the Gates of the Dawn, London, 

Missions to the Heathen: W. E. and M. T. 
Gardner, Winners of the World during Twenty 
Centuries, A Story and Study of missionary 
Efforts from the Time of Paul to the present 
Day, London, 1910. 

S. L. and E. L. Gulick, Outline Studies of the 
Growth of the Kingdom of God, Boston, 1910. 

J. C. Lambert, Missionary Heroes in Oceania, 
London, 1910. 

J. P. lilley. The Victory of the Gospel. A Sur- 
vey of worldrwide Evangelism, London, 1910. 

R. M. Maiden, Foreign Missions: Being a 
Stuchi of Some Principles and Methods in 
the Expansion of the Christian Church, Lon- 
don, 1910. 

T. Moscrop, The Kingdom without Frontiers: 
A Missionary Survey, London, 1910. 

J. Richter, A History of Protestant Missions in 
the Near East, London and New York, 1910. 

C. H. Robinson, The Interpretation of the Char- 
acter of Christ to nonrChristian Races; an 
Apology for Christian Missions, New York, 

R. E. Speer, Christianity and the Nations, New 
York and Chicago, 1910. 

Mrs. A. C. Wilson, The Expansion of Christian^ 
ity: a Study in religious History, London, 

Mithra. Mithraism: A. Dieterich, Eine Mithras- 
Liturgie, 2d ed., Leipsic, 1910. 

Moab: Q. Robinson Lees, Lt/e and Adventures be- 
yond Jordan, New York, 1909. 

Modernism: C. Beaurredon, Le Modemisme ou les 

bases de la foi, Paris, 1910. 
T. Engert, Eias Alte Testament im Lichte mo- 

demistischrkatholischer Wissenschaft, Munich, 

Letters to his Holiness, Pope Pius X., by a Mod- 

emist, Chicago, 1910. 

Mohammed: Baij Nath Sinsh, Letters from a Sufi 
Teacher Treating of the Philosophy of Islam 
and Consisting of English Translation of Exn 
tracts from the Persian Book entitled " Mak- 
tnbdtr^Sadi," an old Sufi^stic Work, Benares, 
T. N5ldeke, Geschichte des Qorans, part 1, 
Ud)er den Ursprung des Qorans, Leipsic, 

Mohammedans, Missions to: A. Thomson, Cru^ 
saders of the Twentieth Centurv, or the Chris- 
tian Missionary and the Muslim, ed. W. A. 
Rice, London, 1910. 

MouNOS, M. de: Extracts from the Spiritual Guide, 
ed. and compiled by R. Y. Lynn, London, 

Monasticism: The Life of an Enclosed Nun. By a 
Mother Superior, London, 1910. 

Mormons: J. H. Evans, One Hundred Years of 
Mormonism; a History of the Church of Jesus 
Christ of Latter-day Saints from 1805-1906, 
Salt Lake City, 1910: idem, Birth of Mor- 
monism in Picture: Scenes and Incidents in 
early Church History from Photographs, Nar- 
ratives and Notes, Salt Lake City, 1910. 

Moses: M. Fluegel, Exodus, Moses and the 
Decalogue Legislation; the central Doctrine 
and regulative Organum of Mosaism, Balti- 
more, 1910. 

MouLTON, W. F. : See above, Findlat. 

Mtsticism: J. MQhlethaler, Die Mystik bei Schopen^ 
hauer, Berlin, 1910. 

Mtthology: Florence V. Farmer, Nature Myths of 
Many Lands, New York, 1910. 
Symbolism of the Bible arid of Ancient Literor 
ture Generally, Being a Study in Comparor 
tive Mythology. By 34 Expectans, 2 vols., 
Calcutta, 1910. 

Naturalism: C. R. Chapman, Naturalism and the 
Church, Boston, 1910. 

Negro: W. Archer, Through Afro-America, New 
York, 1910. 
W. E. B. DuBois, Efforts for Social Betterment 
among Negro Americans; Report of a special 
Study made at Atlanta University under the 
Patronage of the Trustees of the John F. Slater 
Fund; together with the Proceedings of the 
14th annual Conference for the Study of Negro 
Problems, held at Atlanta University on Tues- 
day, May g4th, 1909, Atlanta, 1910. 

Oesterlet, W. O. E.: The Jewish Doctrine of 
Mediation, London, 1910. 

Organization of Christianitt: J. A. Kern, A 
Study of Christianity as Organized, its Ideas 
and forms, Nashville, Tenn., 1910. 



Bardbnhbwkb, O.: named by the pope apootolio 
prothonotary, 1910. 

Bbxr, Q.: became ordinaryprofeflsor of Old Testa- 
ment at Heidelberg, 1009. 

Benham, W.: d. at London, July 30, 1910. 

BossE, F.: became first librarian in the Kaiser 
Wilhehn Library at Posen, 1909. 

BowNE, B. P. : d. at Brookline, Mass., Apr. 1, 1910. 

BuDDE, K. F. C. : chosen rector of the University 
of Marburg for 1910-11. 

BuDEB, P. von: retired from active duties, 1910. 

Clemen, C. C: became extraordinary professor of 
comparative religion and philosophy of religion 
at Bonn, 1910. 

Ck>BB, H. N. : d. at East Orange, N. J., Apr. 17, 1910. 

Ck>NDER, C. R. : d. at Cheltenham (96 m. w.n.w. of 
London), England, Feb., 1910. 

Day, C. O.: d. at Andover, Mass., Apr. 5, 1910. 

Deutbch, S. M.: d. at Berlin, Germany, July 3, 

DoBSCHUETZ, E. A. A. O. A. von: became profes- 
sor of New-Testament exegesis at Breslau, 

DuBBS, J. H.: d. at Lancaster, Pa., Apr. 1, 1910. 

Duchesne, L.: Elected a member of the French 
Academy, 1910 

Funs, P.: became professor of New Testament at 
Halle, 1910. 

Qbxwing, K. M. N. J.: became professor of church 
history at Monster, 1909. 

QuNKEL, J. F. H.: became professor of Old-Tes- 
tament exegesis at Giessen, 1907. 

Hammond, E. P.: d. at Hartford, Conn., Aug. 14, 

Habnack, K. G. a.: retired from editorial staff of 
Theologi9che Literaiurzeitungf 1910. 

HoLTZMANN, H. J.: d. at Baden-Baden Aug. 4, 

Jambs, W.: d. at Chocorua, N. H., Aug. 26, 1910. 

Jessup, H. H.: d. at Beirut, Syria, Apr. 28, 1910. 

JoBDAN, H. S. A.: became extraordinary professor 
of church history and patristics at Erlangen, 

Kaxttzsch, E. F.: d. at Halle May 9, 1910. 

Ebopatbchek, F.: became professor of systematic 
theology at Breslau, 1907. 

LoEHR, M.: became professor of the Old Testament 
at K5nigsberg, 1909. 

LoiST, A. F.: became professor of the history of re- 
ligions. College of France, Paris, 1909. 

McLaben, a.: d. at Edinbuigh BCay 5, 1910. 

Mebbill, S.: d. at Fruitvale, Cal., Jan. 22, 1909. 


Vol. i., p. 103, col. 2, line 1: Read " Concorresani " 
for " Concoresenses." 

Vol. i., p. 248, col. 2, line 19 from bottom: Add 
" and Succession, Apostolic." 

Vol. i., p. 276, col. 2, line 9: Add " See Paul the 
Apostle, I., 1, { 1." 

Vol. ii., p. 62, col. 2: Insert " Bengel, Ernst 
Gottlieb. See Tuebingen School, The 

Vol. ii., p. 57, col. 1, line 26 from bottom: Read 
" 1887 " for " 1897." 

Vol. ii., p. 69, col. 2, line 26: Read " Sevres " for 
" Paris." 

Vol. ii., p. 144, col. 1, line 38: Read " Notker 6 " 

for " NOTKER 4." 

Vol. ill., p. 37, col. 1, line 18 from bottom: Read 
" Oioreut® " for " Chorentce." 

Vol. iii., p. 146, col. 2: Insert ** Clericis Laicos. 
See Boniface VIII." 

Vol. iv., p. 163, col. 2, line 34: Read " 28 " for 
"26"; ib., Ime 22 from bottom: Read 
"Time, Biblical Reckoning of" for 
" Chronology." 

Vol. v., p. 9, col. 1, line 23 from bottom: Read 
" Shedd " for " Stead." 

Vol. v., p. 62, col. 2, line 9 from bottom: Read 
^' Feb. 10, 1900 " for " May 4, 1896 "; ib., 

line 4 from bottom: Read " 1847-49 " for 
" 1847." 

Vol. v., p. 63, col. 1, line 9 from bottom: Read 
^' Boston " for " Philadelphia "; ib., line 8 
from bottom: Read " Philadelphia " for 
" in the same city." 

Vol. v., p. 321, col. 2, line 2 from bottom: Read 
" limbuiK " for " Limbursch." 

Vol. v., p. 346, col. 2, lines 29-30: Read " Lutherans, 
tne article Lutherans, at the end " for 
" home mission . . . Mission." 

Vol. v., p. 466, col. 2, lines 12-14: Read " or what 
mav^ more correctly, be called their forensic 
or '^judicial ' sense, that is putting . . ." 

Vol. vi., p. 23, col. 1 : Insert " International 
Apostolic Holiness Union. See Miscel- 
laneous Religious Bodies, 13." 

Vol. vi., p. 68, col. 2, line 14: Read " Paleario " for 
" Palerio." 

Vol. vi., p. 163, col. 2, upper boxhead: Read 
" Luke " for " John." 

Vol. vi., p. 486, col. 1 : Insert " Light, Friends of. 
S^ Free Congregations in Germany, 

Vol. viii., p. 91, col. 1 : Insert: " Nazarene, Church 
of the. See Pentecostal Church of the 


AbbroTiktlons in common dm or wlf-eTident tn not liiclt]d«d bere. For addldoiud Infomudoii con- 
cerolDg the -works liated, see toLL, pp. vIlL-xx., uidtbeapproprlateutlcleBln thebody of the work. 


Ratin to pmtriitio irorki on handH or 

hanCln. TartuUiui'i Dt vnmeripHimi, 
tbs Prm AaiiWfU ol Itsdbui, tb* 
" of Epiphuiiiu. elo. 

iardutD. C^ntiliorum aOtetio ngia 

A. BTuck. KirAne—AidHi OhiIkA- 
landM, vol. i.. Liiiwc 1904: vol. ii., 
19001 *ol- lii-. 1908: vol iv.. 1003 

SaaUiiektlot>adi4 far ptetutafiliM** Tka- 
ojiww und KinJu, foluded by J. J. 
HemK 3d ad. by A. Hauok, Ltiiwc. 

a.(.ift c. 

I by J. Hscstnrtther, i 

(., Fnibiuc, 1883-B3 

^... ._ . drr kaOclitcMen KirrJit, 
3 Tolt., Podarboni. 1907 
. Hslriit, Hitloin dti ordrti i 
(WWi. mieitra «( milHain; 8 vola.. 

HkatorY^ AUtouv. JhiJtoria 

Binory " 
. Homilio. Aomiliai, " bomily. hos) 

J JabviM (YkhwiM) 

J.4 Jnmul AnoJiqu*, Puff, 1822 wiq. 


Diftumary. . 
Jmfld. RwM^ . 

J at... 

Zrao*'. N*w York »Dd°Laiid'oD!'"l's(w' 
P. Jaff^ AiUioMuo nrum Otrwufn- 

sonuH. voli.. B«rliD. 1804-73 
P. Jafl6, RtQota jtoniiflcam Romantrum 
. . . ad annim /JW. Berlin. ISGl: 
U ed., L«ip«io; 1881-88 
JmrmU tf Vu Amrriam Orimlat Socitli/, 

New Hkven, 1849 aqq. 
Jeunul tf BMioal LUtratun and Bztgt- 
*u, flrft mppeuvd ma Jtmmat of Iht 
SocitHl <4 BOHital LiUralart awt £t«- 
pMit, HiddlstDWu, 18B2-S8, than Bo^ 
. ton, 1890 iqq. 

I n» JtaiA Baeadirptdia, 13 voIl. New 
' York, 1001-06 

Tbe aomUiMd BUTkUve of the Jslivut 
(Vahwin) and Elobiit 

jBr JenmUh 

Jo-pbu.. A»l . . { '^™„''""'''"' "AxtiQui'™ "' t>* 
Joaephui. Apiim .FleTiiu Joaaphui. " Agtiaat Aplon " 
JoMpbiu. Lifi. . . Life of Flnviiu Joeephin 
Joeepbiui. n'<r...FtaTiiu JoM)pha^"Tba JewuhWu" 
Joah Joebus 

•"^^ 1 Lelpelo. 1876 eqq. 

>»D i Tkt Jeauh QuofUrl)/ Rtvita, London, 

'*"* i ISBS •qq. 

*i> JO SJourryi of Qt* Rot/id Atiatic Societu, Loo- 

■'*'** 1 don. 1834 >Qq. 

JnlieD, Hull- I J. Julinn, A Dtctionaru of Ilvnnaltii)!/. 

mIaw } reriHd edition. London. 1907 

KAT SeeSthrwler 


Bd., by J. HentearCIher uid P. Ksuli 
lavof... Fr-iburg, 1882-1903 
, KrllKer. Hwtorj, qf Earlu Ckriiti 

I K. Knunbuhe 

< Firil Tlir 
Oetchichte der bt/ran- 

Labbe. Concilia < 

ampliimma aJlKlia. 31 vols., Flofpntt 
nnJ Vonice, IT5&-B8 

t , p... I J. Laniian, EtdaimUtal Hittorv of In- 

Lanigjn. Bed. J ,„^» j^, „u^ Cmtan,. 4 vote.. Dub- 

LoTwu, iXfQ 



II Haco 

Uu, A'oea ed- 

Hann, Concilia. 


P. Llebtenbarger, Bnendopldi* dM •«■ 

tnou Tdioitim*. 13 roii.. Parii, I8TT- 


'im im i^M^Mirr.' 
,Tha Septua^t 


IwAo, 1 

t, Ronu. 18Z5-3B 

Uu. Strtflermn i 
""^'" '" voH.. Rome, 

R. C. Hann. Uhi i/ tt< Popn in lAe 
Bart)! MidiBt Apm, London. 1902 aqq. 

a. D. Uangi. JaiKftirum nnnliomm 
coltvtio noKi, 31 vola,, Flonnoa and 
Veniw, 1728 


Honuminla Gtrmania Milarira. ed. G. H. 
Peru and othern Hanover and Ber- 
lin, 1826 «qq. The foUowlDR abbrevis- 

■ubwctiona of Ihis work: AnL. Aniioui- 

loTti ajitupiiMMimi. "'oidMl Wnlera"; 
CAron, TBiB.. Chrmiat minora. " Lawr 

lata, ■■ Letl*™ "; Cat 
Qala poniiftcum RoTnan 
of Che Pope, of Homo' 

oruTn. " Deedfl 
'L^i' dt file 

JMta "; Bcript. rer. Langob.. i>mptont 
rtrvm Lorwobonftainim tt llalicamm. 
" Wiitar* on Lombard and Itaiiaa 
aubjeoU": Script, rer. Mtm., Scrip- 


atPL. . . . 

H8., MSS. 
Muraton. Scrip- 

!H. H. Uilman, Hitlorv V (■ahn Ciri*- 
Ndnjtu. InduJirto (Aal of tit opei to 
. . .Hichcla* v.. 8 vols., jjndon. 
C. Uiibt. Qiuttan nr Gadiiehit da Pap*t- 
tumi und dtt rOmitdun Kallwlicitnua, 
TQbingea. 1901 
) J. P. Hiflnt^ Palnloeia cumu comnUtui, 
1 HTiu OneoL ltt2 voIi., Pans, lSfi7-«6 
j J. P. UJADe, Patnloffiit curtui armnUtua, 
1 mrittlaHna. 221 voli.. Paria, 1844-M 
. .Uaaiueript. HaniucripU 
I L. A. Muiatori. Serum llalicanm trip- 
} toTM, 28 vol*.. 1723-Gl 
INtuet ATcMt drr OtttUtduitt Qr atttri 

Neandar, Clai-)' 
Han ChyrA..\ 

Neh J 

Nioaron. Uf- 

Nialaan. Pa-paeu . j 
Nippold. Papacy. 

idax. Boalon. 1872-81 

R. P. Nieeron. Mtmoim pour , 
VhitUfirt da hotnma HaMrtt . 
vols.. Paris, 1729-4S 
(F. K. Niabeo, Hittorg nf l\i Pc 


3 F. NippofdVrfte Papacy in tlu NinctccnA 

I Cenlurv, New York, 1900 

J Neut kirMidit ZciUckrift, Ltipaio, 1800 

) W. Nowack. LehHmch der htbrOitAen 
I ArrhOaloeit, 2 vola.. Frelbuis, 1S94 
. DO place of publication 
( Tht Nic«nt and PoiUNiosm FoArrM. lit 
< nriea. 14vola.,NewYork,188T-92: 2d 
aerlea. 14 Tola.. New York, 1890-1900 



r, a -a i Ordo mmeU BmMeU, " Order □( St. 

O. T Old ToiUniBtit 

OTJC 8m Hmith 

F Priaitly domunnit 

iL. PMtor, n* HMarv tf Ac Pept fnm 
At Clot q/ At Muldit Ann. 8 vols., 
Ltmdoa, I^l-IMS 
BD . ) Pa*va t e d — la AieUtuna, ad. J. A. Qiln, 

'^"^ 1 S4 vola., LandoD, 1S3S-46 

PEF njaatina ExplocmUoB Fund 

I Pet FinI Emrtb of feut 

II Prt Bw»sd Eiidnl* of FM«t 

I B. PbtinB, Linl tf At Pimtfrom . . . 
FlMink, Fapaa. . J. Ongort VII. lo . . . i>aid //.. 2 vol*,. 

f London, n.d. 
PluT. BM. nul... Pliny. Aufurvi nafuralii 

"*'*" 1 inert*. BeiUn, 1896 

Pro* ProTOrbi 

ft Pulnu 

Bsoj iPTottrdinat of Oii Sarittii aj Biblical 

'^"'* ■ 1 Artfcw&uv, London. 1880 Kiq. 

d-T.. qQ.T.. . ,., . .ouod C4u<p) nde. " vhich tm " 

R»Bk* Poiw. . . I 3 vol«.. London. 1008 

RDM Rmrue det drux mondtt. Puii. 1S31 iqq. 

JIS Bee Hauck-Henos 

Baieh. Oooi- jF..RKth.SdKt DocumenlMlUuilraHneMt- 
mtiilt idiatataad Mcdim Hitlmi, Landan. lOOG 

aSJ lUmt da ttudf i«tva, Puin. 1880 Kiq- 

Bettb-fc XD. . , , fc,^ 3 :^; G6ltoi^l84e^8 

BW Book of RiBTelatian 

BiTB J Bmt dt I'hiibdrt dtt rriiciant. Parin. 

""" 1 1880Mq. 

(E. C. Rii^uudHio, Alphab^cai Subjret In- 
dix and Irtdtx Bna/dopardia la Prriod- 
ital Artida on Rdigian. 1890-B9. New 
Af*k»>« r:wm\ .. t A. L. Rjchter. hmrh\ifh drg kaOvAurhen 
Sr^^^^l ""^ rva„0^i.Atn Kinl^tchU. 8lh 

™™ ( *d. by W. K«hl, Leipsic, ISfifl 

BotwuDD, A t. f E. Robinson, ^ibiicot EtttnTcliu in 
HordkeK, uidj Poliifirw, Bonon, 1841, Hnd /ifn- 
Aotir Ra-\ Biblical RanrriAtt in /■oJ^ilint, 3d ed. 
mtBrdtm [ of tbe whole, 3 vain.. 1867 

]Mtii»JNarK. .1 "Wiilorj. Svoli'.. Boslon!'lBS4-(»^'™'' 
BobiDKin mnd (J. B. RobinHm. and C. A. Besrd. DtnlnB- 

VnmiA.Modtrni mrnl of Uodtm Europt. 3 vols.. Boiton, 

Etiropt I 1907 

Rom EpiiUe lo the lUinuuu 

BTP ^'^niJu^'^ " * '**-^*^ 

B.V Baviwd V«r^o (of tbe Engluh Bible) 

ame MKiitum, " eentnry " 

I Sun I SuDiwI 

II Sun 11 Samuel 

ggjl ISiUir^ditriait dtr Btrlintr Afaulniu, 

IF. Hu Holler W otben. Tltt Sacnd 

sag ■{ Baokt of At BaM. Oxford, 1879 *qq., 

I tiA. ilvui., I90i 

iSamiBmAtofAaOldTalammH" Rain- 
bow Bible ''), LdpaB. London, and 
Baltimon. 18M Hiq. 

"%^JF*™'™-^ volii.-iv.,vi.,vii.NewYork,lBS2-92 

^-""^ ( *Dl.T.,2parto.byD. 8. HchaH. 190T-10 

SitmB. CTttd,. . . j 3 ^i^_ ^^ yj,^^_ 1877-8* 

I E. Schrader, CurtAfmn /uinplioiu and 
Sohnder. cor. .{ At Old Tetlamtnt. 2 vola., London. 

f I8SS-8S 
a.j,_ j„ r I V t ^ fiehrmder. i>ia JCniinKAriTlm urul do* 
Sebnder, A.d T . j ^j^, r*rtiii«nA 2 »oU. . Berlin. 1902-03 
Sefandv. KB...\ ^ ,^ g,^^ 1B8»-1901 

(K BohOret. OacAtcAle dri jodiidim 
Valkf im ZrifaJtrryaniCAniti, 4tb«d., 
3mIi.,Leipac. t902«qq.: Eng. trantl., 6 
vda.. New York, ISQl 

Seripl . . .Scriplortt. " writ*™" 

Seiivener. I F. H. A. Scrivener, IntrodaetionlaNea Tlt- 

Introduetion . . \ tamml CnHdtm. 4th ed.. London. 18B4 

Sent SenltnUa, " Sentence* " 

8. J Soeitlat Jetu. " Society of J«Bua " 

S3fA J SiUunaitrniAU der Manditntr Aka- 

1 dnnu, UunJch. 1860 iqq. 

Smith, JTiMft.!^ ■ ■[ gart^ Anbia. London. 1903 

Smilh.OWC...)'" It.. Smith, T'A.OW rMtamml in f^ 

> Jemth Church, London, 1892 
Smith. PmAita (W- K- Smith. PrnphtU of Inatl . . . U 
Bmiiu, 1-mviun. j ^^ ^. ^^ Ctntury. London, 1895 
Smith, S*I. of , W. R. Bmitb. AeTitnon q/ lAi ^cn<if«, 

Son [ London. 1S94 

n p n IT t Sodaiy for the Promotion ol Christian 

^•^■^■>^ ) Knowledge 

o p n t Soraaty tor the Pfopaeation of the Gospel 

°-'^-'^ i in Poreigo Parta 

V York. 1905 

J E, H. McNeal, 

- Midiaml HM 

ITheu... _ _ 

11 Tb*** Second Epietle to lbs ThHsalauians 

Ti,T ] ThtologiidM Tijdichri/I. Amslerdun and 

"" ] Leydpn. 18B7Bqq. 

II Tim. . 


iTheolooiu^tr Jahrethvnchl. Leipaic. 
1887. Fraibure. 1888, Brunswick, 
1897, Berlin. 1898 sqq. 

Ucolini, Thfau 

ThiAiigitAt Quarlaltdvitl. TabiiM(«B. 

J, A. fiobiuoD, Ttxtt and Staditt, 
Camhridce, 1891 Kiq. 

Tranaodiana iJ Oit Saathi of BiUicoJ 
AreAoolofrv. London. 1872 aqq. 

llttoloeitckt Studita und KHMtn. Ham- 
bun. 1826 aqq. 

Ttxit und Umtrtuthimgen nir OocAicM* 
dir aUthrittlidim LUImtvr, ed. O. von 
^ ' ' Hamaek, Laipiio. 



Teatamect " 
Wattanbaeh, J^' Watteohach. DtntocWond* Getdiithlt- 

^*^ I ShftA". 1893-94; 7tb''ed!. 1904^q. ' 

j I. Wellhauaen. Rala arabitdien Heidan- 
I tvmt, Berliii. 18S7 

iJ. Weltiiauaen. Pnltgomma lOTOttdadUi 
< ItraiU, eth td.. Berlin, 1909, Eng. 
f tnnal.. Edinbunh, 188S 

Atvrinlaait. Leipdo, 

''* 1 188*48, B 

Zahn. Einifi- { mmtTsded., Leipiic 1907: Eng. tniiBl.. 
luna . . ....... I Introduction Ut Che Nevf "" ..._.« 

[ vols.. Edinbur^. 1909 

IT. Zahn. OeiehiiAti dtt i „ 

Zahn. Kaaon... . ) lichen Kanont, 2 vol*,, Ldpuc. 1888-92 

iZtUtdiriit /at dit altlettammllifAe ITii- 

ZAT-ir 1 tenKhafU Qieasen, IBBl aqq. 

7n,r } Ziiltduift/Ordtuitehm AUtrllHimiinddeut- 

^"*'' 1 KhtUttntvr. Berlin, 1876 »qq. 

I ZtUtehHJt dtf dtuttAtn morgtnl&nditchtn 

ZDMO ) OaHOnAo/'t. Leipuc. 1847 aqq. 

ZDP iZriltdaitl /Or druticht Philataeit. HmUa, 

ZDPV j ZtiUch^l''df deulK^en PolMtino-Ptr- 

1 tint. Leipae, 1878 aqq. 

Zeefa Zecbariah 

Zeph Zephuuah 

IZ>v!icWl /Or die hitloritdu Thtfitool4, 
ZHT < published niecesmvely at Ltopso, 

I Hambuii. and Gotha. 1832~7G 
■rp/j jZeiltchriSt fitr KircAtngmdtichte, Ootha, 

**•' ) 1878 sqq. 

jg-B \ Zeitechrifl /Or KirdimredU, Berlin, TO- 

1 bin«en. Freiburg. 1981 aga. 

J ZtUedirifl for katholitche 7%eoliioie. Imu- 


^ga/ i Zeiitchr^ifiir kvMi 


-^^-.,-,^ _.. -. jchidl vnd 

. .sirddicha Leben, Leipsic. 1880-S9 

J ZeiUchrifl far dit neuleMamenttiche Wia- 

I itnidiafl. Giesaen. 1900 sqq. 

7PK- \Zeittehrilt /arPrnUtlanlirmutundKirdie. 

^'^'^ ) ErUneen, 1838-76 

i Ziilichrifl far iciiitnichaldirhe Theolocit. 

ZWT i Jana, 1858-60, Halle. 1881-87, Leipaic. 


The following system of transliteration has been used for Hebrew 

K = ' or omitted at the 

r = z 


of a 


n = t 

3 = b 

D = 

a = bh or b 

i = y 

a = g 

3 = k 

a = gh or g 

3 = kh or k 

^ = d 

h = i 

n = dh or d 

D = m 

n = h 

i = n 

1 = w 

D = 8 





ph or p 








The vowels are transcribed by a, e, i, o, u, without attempt to indicate quantity or quality. Arabic 
aud other Semitic langtiages are transliterated according to the same system as Hebrew. Qreek is 
written with Roman characters, the common equivalents being used. 


When the pronunciation is self-evident the titles are not respelled ; when by mere division and accen- 
tuation it can be shown sufficiently clearly the titles have been divided into syllables, and the accented 
syllables indicated. 

as in not 


as in 



<i « 



i< « 



<i If 



« tt 



U tt 




« <f 



l< tt 


tt tt 


tt n 


6 " " nor 
u '•• " full* 
a " " rule 

tt It 

tt tt 


01 " « pine 


tt tt 


ei •* " oil 
ia " '* few 

iu as in duration 
c = k " " cat 
eh " " church 
cw = qu as in ^ueen 
dh (th) " " the 
f " " fancy 


tt tt 


H " " \och (Scotch) 

hw (wh) " " why 

j " " ;aw 

' In aooented syllables only ; In unacwented syllables It approximates tbe sound of e In over. Tbe letter n, with a dot 
beneath It, Indicatn tbe sound of n as In ink. Nasal n (as In Frencb words) is rendered n. 
* In Qerman and Frencb names tt approximates tbe sound of u In dune. 




The Kantian Basis ({ 1). 

His Results (S 2). 

Schleiermacher's Basis ({ 3). 

Relation of Morality to Moral Law ({ 4). 

Conclusion ({ 5). 

To establish a clear distinction between these 
tenns and their relation to one another, it is best to 
start with the treatment of the subject by Kant 
and Schleiermacher. According to 
I. The Kant's system of critical rationalism, 
Kantian to found morals on true principles 
Basis. morality must be derived from the 
general conception of a reasonable 
being. It must then be developed as a pure philoso- 
phy or metaphysics to be applied to man. Previ- 
ous attempts to establish the principles of moral- 
ity failed either because they were purely empirical 
or, when rational, lacked the critical element. 
Kant's Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitien 
(Riga, 1785) and Kritik der praktiachen Vemunft 
(1788) contain his contribution to the subject. 
Naturally there were systems of moral law before 
Kant's time and moral legislators of all kinds, but 
the content of moral prescriptions had been de- 
rived from nature, custom, or arbitrary will. Man 
had indeed established himself as deciding moral 
questions on the basis of the individual conscience, 
but Kant in his critical analysis of the power of 
reason first recognized the secret of morality. The 
essence of moral legislation which he discovered 
was legislation by self. An act is moral which the 
will imposes upon itself in the consciousness that 
the maxim which it is following in any particular 
case can be erected into a universal law. Such acts 
are recognized as duty and done as duty. Man in 
giving moral commands to himself plays the r61e 
of both ruler and subject. The law once accepted 
must be followed even against man's will, neither 
threats nor flattery can be brought into relation 
with it. That will is good which fulfils duty on ac- 
count of duty's sake, recognizing it as a principle of 
application. Universal and necessary elements 
condition morality, so the moral law is like the law 
of nature, but it expresses a necessity without 
force. It is an imperative act of will, not hypo- 
thetical but categorical, valid under all conditions. 
But. applicable only to a reasonable being, it is not 
possible without freedom. This character of free- 
dom established a plaoe for morality in a world dif- 
VIIL— 1 

ferent from that occupied by the phenomenal world 
with its subjection of things to causal relations. 
As autonomous morality is a fact, so freedom is a 
fact. Man has an empirical character as a natural 
being subject to the causal system of nature, but 
he is also an intelligent being belonging to a moral 
supersensible world that proves its existence in no 
way more clearly than by the fact of man's freedom. 
But this reality can not be established by psy- 
chological analysis or historical investigation. The 
moral law and all that it involves must be deter- 
mined by the method of transcen- 
2. His dental criticism. The world of phe- 
Results. nomena must be critically penetrated 
imtil the a priori element of reason is 
sought and found; this is the element that makes 
the objects of the phenomenal world moral. But 
the principle of morality is a formal one as it ap- 
pears in the categorical imperative. It must be 
applied to persons, wills, and aims, and takes the 
practical form of acts done in such a way that the 
individual uses humanity in his own person, as in 
the person of every other individual, always as an 
end, never simply as a means. As to the relation 
established by Kant between morality and religion, 
he rejects all eudemonistic elements, such as those 
which regard happiness as a motive for action. 
But a moral final end must be accepted, so the 
postulates of the practical reason for the existence 
of God and the immortality of the soul are intro- 
duced. By immortality and God, he establishes 
an effect adequate to the general exercise of the 
moral law. It becomes a necessity of reason to as- 
sume a power, the supreme cause of nature and 
the moral creator of the world. In this way man's 
duties are recognized as divine conunands. With- 
out God as the moral creator and law-giver, knowl- 
edge and action, even that willed freely by man, 
remains aimless and incomplete. This was Kant's 
reply to the riddle — man autonomous in the midst 
of the world with the duty of making out of it his 
moral world. The recognition of the categorical 
imperative, or moral law, makes man a moral 
being. The accommodation of his character to 
the law is virtue. Evil is the constant tendency 
to transgress the law, but there is hope for an un- 
ending progress. Kant considered that his system 
was essentially Christian, since the precepts of the 
Gospel recognize a perfection not to be reached by 
any creature, yet offering a model to which man 




could approximate. Even the most difficult parts 
of his teaching, that dealing ^dth the intelligible 
world, intelligible character, and freedom have 
a remarkable relationship to the morality of the 
Gospels. His system approached also German 
popular morality through its rational character, 
its dualistic basis, and its attention to practical 

Schleiermacher moves in a thoroughly different 
world. He deals with moral being, moral impulse, 
moral feeling, moral activity, and, above all, moral 
process. Nature becomes reason and reason, nature. 
The highest good is the imity of reason and nature, 

so there exists no specific difference 

3. Schleier- between natural law and moral law. 

macher's Over against natural law stands not 

Basis. the moral law but the law of reason, 

but a distinction is not made between 
what happens and what ought to happen. The 
moral law is the law given by reason itself, respect 
for the law determines it to be the law. This in- 
ternal recognition is of more importance than the 
external act; it is the real element of moral being, 
in which the phenomenal act may share more or 
less completely. The moral law is a law then that 
determines being, not simple obligation ; morality is 
the being or becoming demanded by this law. The 
first stage has been entered upon, but the transforma- 
tion of reason into nature is not yet completed. The 
question arises whether the subject of this being or 
becoming is man alone. Schleiermacher is not an 
individualist. The morality of the individual man is 
only a part of the morality of the collective per- 
son, the family, the State, the Church. It is wrong, 
he says, to make the individual the subject and the 
substratimi of moral life. Man's acts can not be 
isolated; individuals are to be regarded as organs 
and symbols of reason which really deal with the 
whole of nature. It is not easy to see why God, 
who is the cause of the opposition between reason 
and nature, is not himself the subject of the moral 
process. It will be seen that Schleiermacher's dis- 
cussion of morality takes up exactly that sphere 
and occupies those interests which were entirely 
neglected by Kant. The field of history is made 
the field of ethical investigation. Schleiermacher's 
ethics, therefore, must be regarded as being a re- 
ligious philosophy, a discussion of civilization, a 
view of the world and its progress, as much as a 
system of morality. He treats the subject as an 
organio whole. Moral predicates are associated 
with the phenomenal world, with its things and its 
processes. Anything which can serve its special end 
can be called good, can have a value. This exten- 
sion of the application of the term morality to 
finite being under the power of reason leads really 
to HegePs position by which all being is found to 
be reasonable, in whose system ethics has properly 
no place. The highest good is, according to Schleier- 
macher, the unity of the being of reason in nature. 
It comes into consciousness only through the mu- 
tual relations of all examples of good. He shows 
remarkable power in bringing together for this pur- 
pose the whole of life in its various concrete forms. 
Elementary moral conceptions are prior to the 
conception of morality. The activity of the form- 

ative functions, as in friendship, hospitality, com- 
munity of class interest, produces an identity of 
type seen in all. He gave a wider significance to 
Christian ethics than was accorded to it in philo- 
sophic systems. For him it meant the orderly ar- 
rangement of rules by which the member of the 
Christian Church directs his life. Without experi- 
ence no moral rule is possible. In regard to relig- 
ion, he insisted on the full independence of religion 
from morality. As distinguished from Kant, his 
view of the ethical element in facts had a broader 
horizon, but the obligatory element in morality 
seems to be dissolved in the study of its static 

It is plain, therefore, that Kant supplies a more 
important and purer type of ethical knowledge. 
Kant is normative where Schleiermacher is de- 
scriptive. Apart from Kant's formulation of the 
categorical imperative, ethical inter- 
4. Relation est finds itself without a guiding prin- 
of Morality ciple in the wide survey of moral 
to Moral values, powers, and aims. The con- 
Law, ception of duty is all-important, and 
without moral autonomy duty is im- 
possible. Moreover, the character of duty can not 
be decided by investigating its origin, its necessary 
character is not related with its historical mani- 
festations. History has established the right of this 
autonomous treatment, but it does not explain the 
secret. After all biological, psychological, and so- 
ciological methods of investigation have been drawn 
upon, that very factor without which the whole 
moral world can not be grasped at all is still left 
in obscurity. The problem of freedom can not be 
solved in this way, for in the sphere of natural law 
there is no freedom. Nobody has brought out this 
contrast better than Kant, who insisted upon the 
natural capacity of the human will to lay down 
moral laws for itself. On the bosis of these laws 
freely given there arises a realm of good persons, 
voluntarily true to duty, setting no other law for 
themselves than what can be a maxim for their 
neighbors also. Kant's moral man is not the indi- 
vidual man, but the universal man. This capacity 
of laying down the moral law in universal terms 
can not be drawn out by some mysterious power 
from within; it depends on education, on instruc- 
tion of every kind. Philosophy and history must 
contribute their share, especially history. But a 
clear idda of what morality is must exist before the 
matter supplied by history can be justly discrim- 
inated. Is there not in this a danger of simple rela- 
tivism? Is not to comprehend everything to par- 
don everything? So one sees in monism how the 
distinction between good and evil is faint or passes 
away altogether. The only solution is in practise. 
The constant exercise of the feeling of duty with 
its practical discrimination leads to virtue. Chris- 
tian morality is, in the first place, autonomous, de- 
pendent on nothing outside of it. The morality of 
Jesus and of Paul is concerne<l with the inner man, 
is deep, pure, and true. Its exprassion is conditioned 
by the prevalent ideas of the time as is seen in the 
eschatological expectations of the early Christians. 
The characteristics of Roman Catholic morality are 
its dependence on authority and its casuistic develop- 




ment. It is obvious that in the absence of inde- 
pendence man ceases to be a moral being. So the 
surrender of one's moral freedom from pious motives 
is evil. The same criticism must be based on the 
absolute dependence of Protestants on the actual 
letter of the Bible. In the scientific sense this is im- 
moral, it violates the freedom of the Christian man. 
The English word morality is connected with the 
Latin moa, " cxistom." The German Sitie contains 
the same idea, since it means " man- 
5. Con- ner of Ufe," " usage " in a general ex- 
clusion, ternal sense, or refers to an internal 
characteristic. Thus it appears that 
in wide circles the customary is regarded as the 
good and the proper, morality therefore meaning 
what is accepted through the force of custom, 
hardly to be differentiate from habit. Naturally 
these traditional customs can be good or bad, but 
in their origin they are natural; without the force 
of custom social institutions, such as the family 
and the State, are incomprehensible. In these 
forms, of course, morality is at work, but custom 
does not make morality. Through processes of 
change the old and the new custom contend for the 
mastery. Forms of morality or inunorality come 
into question in these processes only from the fact 
that the persons who take part in them are by na- 
ture moral beings. It is through morality that the 
individual man emancipates himself from custom, 
establishes his freedom, and creates a place where 
be can l^islate by himself for himself so far as his 
conduct is concerned. In the ethics of the New 
Testament the word " old " is almost always used 
interchangeably with bad and new is equivalent to 
good; in dogma, with its acknowledgment of orig- 
inal sin, bad is anterior to good. Doth Jesus and 
Paul, in their contests with old traditions and old 
customs, were contending for the sphere of free- 
dom. Yet a revolutionary attitude against custom 
such as is foimd in Rousseau and in the whole ro- 
mantic school up to Nietzsche has no absolute 
moral worth in itself. The question is complicated, 
old customs give way, but custom itself does not 
disappear, novel teachings and novel practises be- 
come themselves customs, as is seen in the case of 
the Social Democratic party in Germany with its 
daim not only to erect a political program but to 
control the details of the life of its Individual mem- 
bers. Advocates of the new may, besides, easily 
confuse ethical with esthetic interests. It must be 
remembered, too, that traditions which at one 
time possess a moral value may lose that character 
if they are not sincerely appropriated by those who 
maintain them. Custom is not the source of mo- 
rality, but it is the ground on which morality can 
work. The Church above all is an institution which 
creates custom; but in its reformed Evangelical 
type it is bound to adhere to its original claim and 
purpose of giving the freest play in custom to mo- 
rality. In popular usage, the word morality has 
come to have a restricted sense. Associations for 
improving morality have brought up practical prob- 
lems and nunaerous proposals for solving them. 
There is only one morahty, the self-legislation of a 
personah'ty under the control of the categorical 
imperative. Practical questions, no matter how | 

novel they may be, can be answered only under the 
influence of the old ethics. For each person moral 
freedom is decisive; and similarly for the entire 
social whole and its conduct as a whole, which is 
nothing but the working together of moral in- 
dividual decisions. See Ethics; and Moralists, 
British. (Martin Radb.) 

Bibuoobapht: The principal works of Schloiermacher bearioi; 
upon the subject are: Grundlinien einer Kritik der biaherigen 
SiUenlehre, Berlin, 1803; ErUwurf eines Syatema der Sit- 
tenlehre, ed. A. Schweiser, Ootha. 1835; GrundrisM der 
philoaophiachen Ethik, ed. D. A. Twesten. Berlin. 1841; 
PhUoaophische SiUenlehre, ed. J. H. von Kirchmann. ib. 
1870; ChrieUiche SiUenlehre, ed. L. Jonas. Gotha, 1891. 
Discuaaions of the ethics of Kant and Schleiermacher are 
named under the articles on these philosophers. A con- 
siderable list of works germane to the subject will be 
foimd under Ethics. Consult further: R. Rothe. The- 
olooiache Ethik, 4 vols.. Wittenberg, 1868-71; G. Rdme- 
lin, Ueher den Begriff einet tozialen OeeeUea, Freibr^, 
1876; idem. Ueber daa Weeen der Getoohnheit, ib., 1881; 
L. Wiese, I7e6er den aiUlichen Wert gegebener Formen^ 
Berlin. 1878; T. Hoppe, ChriaUiche SiUe, Hanover, 1883; 
D. Frick, Ueber daa Weaen der SiUe, Heilbronn, 1884; R. 
von Ihering. Der Z week im Recht, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1898; C. 
Stange, EinleUung der Ethik, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1900-01; M. 
Wentscher. Ethik, 2vo\s., Leipsic, 1902-05; B. Bauch. Luther 
und Kant, Berlin. 1904; H. Cohen. Ethik dea reinen Willena, 
Berlin. 1904; W. Heremann, Ethik, Ttibingen, 1904; W. 
Koppelman, Kritik dea aitUichen Beumaataeina, Berlin, 1904; 
F. Troeltsch, Politiache Ethik und ChriaterUum, Gattingen, 

Catholic archbishop of Sydney, Australia, and car- 
dinal-priest of Santa Susanna; b. at Leighlinbridge 
(7 J m. s.w. of Carlow), County Carlow, Ireland, 
Sept. 16, 1830. He was educated at the Irish Col- 
lege of St. Agatha at Rome from 1842 to 1856, and 
in 1856 was appointed professor of Hebrew in the 
College of the Propaganda, as well as vice-presi- 
dent of the Irish College. From 1866 to 1872 he 
was private secretary to Cardinal Cullen, besides 
being a professor in the seminary at Dublin. In 
1871 he was consecrated titular bishop of Olba to 
be coadjutor to the bishop of Ossory, whom he suc- 
ceeded in the full administration of the diocese in 
the following year. In 1884 he was elevated to the 
archdiocese of Sydney, and within a year was cre- 
ated cardinal. He is a member of the Congrega- 
tions of the Consistory, Bishops and Regulars, the 
Propaganda, and Indulgences. He has written, 
among other works. Memoirs of the Most Reverend 
0. Plunket, Archbishop of Armagh (Dublin, 1861); 
Historical Sketch of the Persecutions suffered by the 
Catholics of Ireland under the Rxde of Cromwell and 
the Puritans (1862); Essays on the Origin, Doc- 
trines, and Discipline of the Early Iri^ Church 
(1864) ; History of the Catholic Archbishops of Dub- 
lin since the Reformation, i (1864) ; SpicUegium Os- 
soriense: being a Collection of original Letters and 
Papers illustrative of the History of the Irish Church 
from the Reformation to 1800 (3 series, 1874-^84); 
Irish Saints in Great Britain (1879); Catholic 
Prayer Book and Manual of Meditations (1883); 
Occasional Papers (1890); History of the Catliolic 
Church in Aiistralasia (Sydney, 1897); The Catho- 
lics of Irdand under the Penal Laws in the Eigh- 
teenth Century (London, 1899); The Three Patrons 
of Irdand (1905); and The Priests and People of 
Ireland (1905). He has also edited M. Archdall's 
Monasticon Hibemicum: or, A History of the Ab- 


bits, Priority, and olhrr Rdigioas Houses in Ire- 
land (Diililin, 1S71-73) and Acta Sancli Srnu/uni 

HORATA, OLIHPU: ProtrBtant; b. iit 
Fcrrara 1526; d. al Ileidolberg Oct. 26, 1555. She 
received a tliarough education in Latin under the 
direction of her father, the Humanist Fulvio Pel- 
legrini, who lived at the court of Ferrara as teacher 
of the Princes IppoUlo and Alfonso, and in Greek 
under (bo Prok»tant Kilian Sinnpi (Senf). In 
1540 Olimpia was drawn to the court as companion 
and fellow pupil of Princcus Anna of Estc; and 
" BOon shone as a afar in the clioir of the Duchoss 
Itenata." She likewise took part in produeini;, be- 
fore Paul III.. 1543, the Adetphi of Terence; the 
leading rAIca falling to the ducal princes and prin- 
cesses. Her life in court came to an end in 1548 
by reason of the marriage of the princesses. Soon 
after she was stricken by the sudden death of her 
fatlier, and her return to court did not eventual';, 
possibly because of her Lutheran bent and the 
duke'H opposition to that tendency. Slic married, 
in 1550, the physician GrQndler of Schtvcinfurt. In 
spring the young couple journeyed across the Alps, 
taking with thorn Olimpia's brother, a lad of eight 
years, with a view to fixing their home at Scbwein- 
furt, in the following October. Olimpia's letters 
teutity to the happiness of tier marriage, and to her 
deep Evanf^elicai piety. In 1553 the ao-cullod 
" wild Margrave " Albrcclit of Brandenburg- Ansbncii 
captured the town of Schweinfurt, after the mer- 
cenaries of the bishop had camped about the town 
and Introduced the plague. The capture of the 
city was attended with murder and plundcrin;^^ 
from which Grllndler barely saved hie life, and (leil 
with Olim|iia through the Spessort and Odenwald, 
finding shelter finally in the castle of tlie coiuit of 
Erbach. He contrived to obtain a medical pro- 
fessorship at Heidelberg in 15S4; but afflictions 
and hardships had undermined his wife's health, 
and she dieil in the very next year. A contuKi'^us 
disease soon carried ofT lu'r husband and Iier brother, 
and all were bud to rest in the cemetery of St. 
Peter's Chureh, where their rcstiiig-place is marked 
by a gravestone with a loucliiiig inscription. The 
town of Schwcinfurt has also marked the house in 
which Olimpia dwelt, with a tablet inscribed: 
Villi et cxiliH dnmiu biro ouitmviii, hahitsUii 
Clara tomon Dtuvm est fsdl M nb^bnni. 
" A fjunDiui nomim ilwcllinn in thu h»uw, 

Hbb by hnr Bimplb JwelliELg tbom 
Made its celebrity." 

BlBUOOn^rBT: Her Opera, inelmiing her lellm, wnro «1- 
itod by C. S. Curitinc. HiihiI. 1558, ISea, IfiTO, I5R0. Ili- 
OKraphlm BTo by Q. A. Nnlten, Fnnkforl. 1775; it. Turn- 
hull. ItiwKin, 1S4H: and (bcl) hy J. Ilunnct. Paru, IS50. 
OiMult ab» U. Fnnliiiiii. Rtnala di Franria. il. 2i3 h|ci., 
Itume. IKail; E. Rwlnmnnchi. Unt pntrrlrire de la rf- 
hrm' m Ibilie el m France. Rettir de France, duihaac 
dt Ferrurr, Palis, 1896. 

KORAVUnS. See Unity of the nREmmN. 

MORE, HAITNAH: English anlhoress and phi- 

lanlhropisl.; I>. iit Rtnpleton (3 m. n. of Hrislol) 

Feb. 2, 1745; d. at Clifton (aauburiiof IIristol)Sppt. 
7, JS33. She wa.s educated at Bristol by her father, 
who was the village schoolmaster. At the age of 

sixteen she produced a paatiiral cirama, entitled 
The Search aftrr llappine»a (not published until 
1773), and in 1774 the tragedy The InflenbU Cap- 
live, and several pocnu; in 1777 a tragedy, Pavy 
(brought out by Garriek, and played for fourteen 
nights); and in 1779 her la.-<t tragedy. The Fatal 
Fid»ehood. But, her views liaving changed, after 
Garrick's death in 1779, she declared that she did 
not " consider the stage, in its present state, as be- 
coming tile appearance or countenance of a Chris- 
tian; on wliich account she thought proper to re- 
nounce her dramatic productions in any other light 
than OS mere poems." Henceforth slie turned her 
attention to religious themes and non-dramatic 
poetry, and wrote very many pieces, long and short. 
Of these the most famous are the popular tales in 
the monthly publication entitled The. Cheap Ro- 
pogiiory, begun in Bristol, 1705. Such stories at 
Parley the Porter, {Hack GUe» (fte Poacher, and above 
all, The She/ihtrd o/ Saliatniry Plains, have not only 
been very widely cireulatcd, but l»ave endeared 
their author to many houscliolda. Not read much 
to-day, but once very popular, are: Thmiyhti on 
Hie Manners of Uie Grml (1788); Rdigion of the 
FwAiomble WorUI (17U1); Strictures on the Mo-t- 
em System of Female Edvcatian (London, 1709); 
Hints tmcard Forming tJte Clutraeler of a Yout\g 
Princess (1805; she liad been recommended by 
Bishop Porteus for governess to the little I'rincesa 
Charlotte, daughter of George 111., but court-eti- 
quette required a lady of rank for this position); 
C(ri(*s in Search of a Wife (1S09; her most popular 
work, ten editions having been sold in first year); 
Practieal Piety (1811); Christian MoraU (1813); 
EsBai/ on the Characttr and Writings of St. Paul 
(1815); Mixlcrn Skrtches {\1i\^): Spirit of Prayer 
(1S25). Her collected works were published 8 vols., 
London, ISOl; 10 voU., 1818, in 11 voh., 1830. 
Her poemn were collected in IStG and 1S20. 

When she gave up writing for tlio stage, she also 
turned her back u|>oti the fitshioimble and brilliant 
society ill London, in which slic hod lived as a fa- 
vorite fur five years, and retired to Bristol, and 
then, in 17S0, to her " little thatched hermitage " 
at Cowslip Cirecn, at Wringtun, ten miles from Bris- 
tol. There, in 1790, she was joined by her sislurs, 
who had long kept acliool nt Bristol; and together, 
upon the su<;gestion of Witbcrforcc, they b<^n to 
establish Sunday-schools and other religious and 
pliilanthro]}ic meetings at Cheddar and a number 
of other plncen. In these, Hannah taught tlie Bilite 
and catechism. In 1802 they all moved to Barley 
Wood. In 18l!8 Hannah, who surviveii her eiHters, 
removed to Clifton, where Bhe died. Hannah 
More was in every w.iy a reniark-ible woman. Slie 
was con^ilercil one of the great reformers of con- 
teni|>orary nmnncrs and morals. Her philanthropic 
tabors were abundant and successful. She received, 
it is said, upward of tliirty thousand pounds sterling 
for her writings, and lip'iuriithe'l ten thousand 



MORE, HENRY: One of the most distinguished 
members of the school of Cambridge Platonists 
(q.v.); b. at Grantliara (23 m. s.8.w. of Lincoln), 
Lincolnshire, 1614; d. at Cambridge Sept. 1, 1687. 
He was educated at Eton and Christ's College, Cam- 
bridge (B.A., 1635; M.A., 1639) and was elected to 
a fellowship, being ordained about the same time. 
He passed practically the entire remainder of his 
life within the walls of his college, refusing all pre- 
ferment except a prebend at Gloucester, which he 
held for a short time in 1676, though three collegiate 
headships, the deanery of St. Patrick's, Dublin, 
and two bishoprics were offered to him. He was 
strongly attached to the cause of Church and king, 
even in the period of parliamentary supremacy, 
and was an indefatigable and voluminous author. 
His works, by their mystical character, did not 
commend themselves to the practical and skeptical 
eighteenth century; but John Wesley praised them 
highly, and Coleridge declared that they contained 
more original, enlarged, and elevating views of 
the Christian dispensation than he had met with 
in any other single volume. His best-known book 
is the Divine Dialogues, 1668, in which various 
speakers discuss the attributes and providence of 
God. This book contains in a condensed form most 
of his characteristic views in philosophy and relig- 
ion. In his method and the basis of his thought he 
occupies the common ground of the Cambridge 
school He was a vigorous advocate of the rights 
of reason, and the main scope of his studies was to 
demonstrate the rationality of the Christian relig- 
ion. But while reason was to him the only sure 
foundation of divine truth, he advocated strongly 
the recognition of a higher principle " more noble 
and inward than reason itself," to which he gives 
the name of " divine sagacity." The emphasis laid 
by him upon the fact that in order to apprehend 
higher divine truth it must be approached with a 
right disposition as well as a free and unprejudiced 
intellect became the key-note of his whole system. 
With such a rational basis for his thought, it is 
surprising that he developed so strong an element 
of mysticism and even of credulity. He was a firm 
believer in the current tales of witchcraft and re- 
counts at great length stories of ghosts and appari- 
tions, setting them forth as attestations of the su- 
pernatural. In his Antidote against Atheism^ 1652, 
the first and second books present the theistic argu- 
ment in an acute and logical manner, while. the 
third is entirely devoted to tales of this kind. His 
tendency to mystical extravagance partially ex- 
plains why, after being at first an ardent admirer 
of Descartes, he came later to oppose him even with 
bitterness, and the MamuU of Metaphysics, 1671, 
was expressly designed to refute Cartesianism. His 
aim, and that of the Cambridge philosophy in gen- 
eral, was the vindication of a true sphere of spir- 
itual being; the proof and definition of incorporeal 
sulwtances seems to him the sole object of metar 
physics. His Manual of Ethics, 1666, is the clear- 
est and most compact of his works. In it he de- 
fines morality as ** the art of living well and hap- 
pily "; goodness and Lippiness are to him merely 
different a.spccts of the highest law of our being, or 
what the older moralists spoke of as the summum 

bonum (see Good, the Highest). Moral goodness 
is simple and absolute; right reason is the judge of 
its nature, essence, and truth, but its attractive- 
ness and beauty are felt by a certain capacity, the 
" boniform faculty," not unlike the " moral sense " 
of later writers. 

BiBLioGBAPirr: R. Ward, The Life of , , , Dr. H, More, 
London, 1710; J. Tulloch, Rational Theology • . . tn 
Enoland in the 17th Century, ii. 303-400. Edinburgh, 1872; 
DNB, xxxvui. 421-423. 

MORE, SIR THOMAS: Lord chancellor of Eng- 
land, the foremost English representative of the 
learning and aspirations of the earlier Renaissance, 
was born in Milk Street, Cheapside, London, Feb. 
7, 1478; he was executed on Tower Hill, London, 
July 6, 1535. His father, Sir John More, a lawyer, 
was a judge, and his maternal grand- 
Life, father, Thomas Graunger, was sheriff 
of London. More attended St. An- 
thony's School in Threadneedle Street and in 1491 
became a member of the household of John Mor- 
ton (q.v.), archbishop of Canterbury and chancel- 
lor, on whose recommendation he was sent to Ox- 
ford, entering Canterbury Hall (afterward absorbed 
in Christ Church) about 1492. He was not a plod- 
ding scholar, but he learned to read Greek readily 
and to write good Latin; he also studied French, 
mathematics, and history and mastered the viol 
and the flute. After about two years, however, he 
was back in London studying law in accordance 
with his father's wish. He was speedily called to 
the bar, became a highly esteemed lecturer on law 
at Furnival's Inn, and later ranked among the first 
lawyers of England. Between 1499 and 1503 he 
passed through a period of strong religious emotion 
and contemplated becoming a priest. He adopted 
a severely ascetic life and even thought of joining 
the Franciscans. At this time he gave lectures on 
Augustine's " City of God " in the church of St. 
Lawrence Jewry, of which his former Oxford tutor, 
William Grocyn, was rector. 

Ever afterward More remained abstemious in 
life and wore sackcloth next to his skin. In 1503, 
however, he returned with ardor to his profession 
and entered the field of politics. He became mem- 
ber of parliament (1504), undersheriff of London 
(1510), envoy to Flanders to negotiate in favor of 
English commerce (1515) and to Calais to arrange 
disputes with France (1516), master of requesta 
(i.e., examiner of petitions presented to the king 
on his progresses through the country) and privy 
councilor (1518), subtreasurer to the king (1521), 
speaker of the house of commons (1523), high 
steward of Cambridge University and chancellor of 
the duchy of Lancaster (1525), and succeeded 
Wolsey as lord chancellor in 1529. He was knighted 
in 1521. Not favoring the divorce of Catharine of 
Aragon and disapproving of ecclesiastical changes 
desired by the king, he resigned as chancellor in 
May, 1532. For a year and a half he lived in re- 
tirement mainly engaged in religious controversy 
with Tyndale and Frith. But he was too notable a 
man to be suffered to maintain even a tacit opposi- 
tion to the royal wishes and policy. He barely 
escape<l conviction in connection with the pro- 
ceedings against the Holy Maid of Kent (see Bar- 




TON, Elizabeth) and in April, 1534, was com- 
mitted to the Tower for refusing to take an oath 
impugning the pope's authority. In spite of en- 
treaties and threats he steadfastly refused to ac- 
knowledge the king as head of the Church and July 
1, 1535, was indicted of high treason. On his trial 
he declared that he had made a seven years' study 
of the history of the papacy and was convinced 
that it rested on divine law and prescription; he 
admitted that he had never consented to the king's 
marriage with Anne Boleyn. He was found guilty 
and sentenced to be hanged, but wa9 ultimately be- 
headed by royal conmiutation of the sentence. 

To continue faithful to principle no matter what 
it cost, to be honest, kindly, ever active in some 
good and useful work, were the guiding motives of 
M ore's life. When he first entered parliament he 
successfully opposed extortionate demands of Henry 

VII., who, so it is said, imprisoned 
More as and fined his father in consequence, 
a Man. His brilliant success in public life later 

was won by no compromising self- 
seeking, and he dared antagonize the powerful 
Wolsey and his master when duty demanded. In 
the practise of his profession he gave clients dis- 
interested service and strove to prevent imjust and 
frivolous suits. As chancellor he despatched the 
business of his court with an imprecedented rapid- 
ity and often settled disputes without trial; he lis- 
tened to the poor as readily as to the rich and was 
deaf to pleas of kindred and friends. He advised 
all judges to temper the rigor of the law with equity. 
He had invincible courage, an active mind, and 
ready wit, and was an inveterate jester, and with an 
element of whimsicality in his character. In 1505 
he married Jane Colte of Newhall, near Chelmes- 
ford, Essex, who died about 1511. More then mar- 
ried a widow, seven years older than himself, de- 
scribed as " neither beautiful nor well educated, 
but a good housekeeper." His devotion to duty 
and strong conmmnd over himself made More a 
good husband and both marriages were happy. In- 
deed, it is in his family and private life perhaps 
that he is most winsome. In 1523 he bought land 
in Chelsea and built there a famous house (demol- 
ished in 1740; its site is marked by the present 
Beaufort Street). More's hospitality was bound- 
less and of the finest and best. He sought eagerly 
the company of the men of the new learning — 
Linacre and Grocyn after they came from Oxford 
to London, John Colet and William Latimer, the 
grammarian William Lily, and others like them in 
England. He met Erasmus when the latter first 
visited England in 1497; thereafter they corre- 
sponded regularly. Erasmus was one of the first 
to be entertained by More in his house after his 
marriage and he finished his Monas encomium (i.e., 
** Praise of Folly ") under the same hospitable roof 
on another visit in 1508; the book is dedicated to 
More and the title is a play upon his name. At 
Antwerp in 1515 More met Peter Giles (^Egidius), 
and he added Buddseus to the circle of his friends 
at the field of the Cloth of Gold in 1520. Holbein, 
the painter, introduced by Erasmus, came to the 
Chelsea house in 1526 and is said to have stayed 
three years. He painted pictures of More and his 

family. More's interest in art was strong and he 
filled his house with the curious things dear to the 

He was scrupulously exact in all religious ob- 
servances, yet encouraged simplicity in the church 
service; but he was not insensible to ecclesiastical 
abuses. He wished, however, for reform of the 
Church from within, orderly, and guided by the 
regular and competent authorities. Furthermore, 
he saw beneath the surface and deprecated removal 
of one evil by setting up another. As chancellor 
he pronounced severe judgments in religious cases 
and has been sharply criticized therefor. But his 
course herein was consistent with his character and 
his life, and his motives were correct. He hated here- 
tics, he wrote to Erasmus — ^their vices, not their 
persons, he explained in the Apology (chap, xlix.; 
the work was published in 1533; in it More defends 
his course in controversy and advocates severe 
treatment of heretics). More was beatified by Pope 
Leo XIII. in 1886. 

While a law student More wrote verses and come- 
dies " for his pastime." He entered the field of re- 
ligious controversy in 1523. Henry VIII. (perhaps 
with More's help) issued an Assertio septem aacnp- 
mentorum (1521) in answer to Luther's " Baby- 
lonish Captivity." Luther replied 
His vehemently and More then took up the 
Writings, dispute in an Opus quo refeUit Lutheri 
calumniaa (London, 1523) imder the 
pseudonym of William Ross. His first controver- 
sial book in English was A Dialogue . . . wherein 
be Treated Divers Matters . . . Touching the PesH- 
lent Sect of Luther and Tyndale (London, 1529). It 
was written chiefly against Tyndale and was fol- 
lowed by a series of similar writings which was in- 
terrupted only by More's death. His manner in 
controversy was in no better taste than that of 
others of the time. His translation (from the Latin) 
of the life of Pico della Mirandola by the latter 's 
nephew is significant (printed by Wynkyn de Worde 
in 1510) as the Italian philosopher was in a certain 
sense the model of More's life. An incomplete His- 
tory of Richard III, was printed in an incorrect ver- 
sion in 1543 and then from an authentic copy in 
More's Works (1557) ; there is a Latin version, which 
differs somewhat from the English and is thought 
by some to have been written by Cardinal Morton 
and served as the basis of the English, in the 1566 
edition of More's Latin works. More's famous 
book, the Utopia^ consists of two parts, the second 
written while he was in the Netherlands in 1515, 
the first in London the next year. Erasmus ar- 
ranged for its publication (Louvain, Dec, 1516; 2d 
ed., Paris, 1517; 3d ed., illustrated by Holbein, 
Basel, 1518). More relates that in Antwerp he was 
introduced by Peter Giles to one Raphael Hythlo- 
day, a Portuguese, who had just returned from ex- 
tensive travels in the New World. At the mention 
of England in the conversation which followed 
Hythloday criticized its social condition and laws, 
especially in relation to theft. The land, he said, 
was ovemm by discharged soldiers after the fre- 
quent and fruitless wars; an idle gentry main- 
tained idle servants who were liable to lose their 
places by the death of their masters; and the new 


bodlords wore rauinj; rentis, establishing sheep 
ftnoB, and evicting huabandnien. The sufFcrera 
must steal to live; and then the law hanged them. 
All this was to make thieves Brat and then punish 
Ihrm with a penalty too severe for the offense. 
More adviaed Hythloday to enter the service of 
lomo prince. But the latter replied that it would 
be futile; princes were too bent on eolai^ing their 
daminiona and governed for their own ambition, 
Dot the good of their aubjecta; moreover, tlicy would 
not liaten to his remedy, which was community of 
gooda. Uore expressed doubts of the remedy, and 
Hytbkxlay replied that it worked in Utopia, an 
iiland which he had visited in hia travels. Then 
follows the description of Utopia (equivalent to 
" Nowhere "; from Gk. ou, " not," and iopos, 
" place ") in the second book. It is an ideal com- 
monwealth (in Hythloday'a estimation) where vices 
do not flourish and poverty is unknown becauKe 
there is do private property and no money. Agri- 
culture is the cliief industry and all persons work. 
Sanitary conditions are carefully looked after in the 
dties. Magistrates are elected. Meals are enjoyed 
■t a table common to thirty families. Travel is not 
permitted without leave of the magistrate. War is 
considered inglorious, but is waged in self-defense, 
knd then they think it more creditable to conquer 
by guile than by prowess. Prisoners of war and 
thoae guilty of moral oiTenses are made slaves. 
There is religious toleration with slight restriction. 
The book is a keen satire on social and economic 
conditions. Certain it is that judged by his other 
writings and his practise Hore's political philoso- 
phy was not that of Utopia. In the book Itself he 
counaela Hythloday so to order " that which you 
can not turn to good that it be not very bod. For 
it were not possible for all things to be well tmless 
all men were good. Which I think will not be yet 
thi« good many years." The Utopia was written 
in Latin; franslationswereisBuedasfollows; French, 
Paris, t&oO, 2d ed., Lyons, 15.i9; othcra, Amster- 
dam. 1643 and 1715, Paris, 1780; English, by Ralph 
Robinson, London, 1551; by Gilbert Burnet, I68J; 
1^ Arthur Cayley, London, 1808; and by V. Paget, 
New York, 1909; German, Basel, 1524; Leipsic, 
1753, IS46; Italian, Venice, 154K; Dutch, Antwerp, 
1&33, 1^2; Spanish, Madrid, 1790. 

Mare's nephew, William Raatell, published a 

collected edition of his English writings at London, 

1557. His Latin works were collected at Banel, 

1563, more fully, Louvain, 1555, and roost complete 

collection of all at Frankfort and Leipaic, 1680. 

BtBUonRAFBT: TtiB oriBinal Life wm by William Kopor 

(Hon'i ■□'iBw). Tht lAft, Arraian^iita. and Death 

^ . . . Si/r Thinna* Mim. Piiris. 1^20. later rditjana, 

Londnn, 1716, I7». ISSO (in tha Cam*W CUmia. pre- 

Ginl to the Vtapta); snollur wu by C. More Uhe btIioI- 

u-'i grMI-«(r»inl-on). Lumlun, 1626; T. Slaplelun'* Ttii 

Tlioma, Douar. 15SS. is volualile. Onpaii mid valimblo 

malcnol is fountl In the EpiilUt of Erumiu. Tbo l>r-t 

modrni acwiuDt in by T. £. Bridgett. London, 1891. 

Olhu liT« or akelche* kn: J. Hodd»diin. London. 1652; 

C. T. von Budhiu-t, Nuremberg. 1829; W. J. W.lter. 

London. IS40: J. Msckintosb. ib. 18M; C. Words-oHh. 

in ChriMian SceUnattuol BvKintAv, 4 vols., lb. IS*!; 

F. Seebi>hio. in Oj/iwrf RiforTurt of UBS. ib.. 1S67. new 

»d.. 1896: D. Ninard, in Etuda mr It tmoiwonw. Fane. 

IS77- J H Umradea, Philamorut. London, 187B; R. Baum- 

ttMtki Fniburg. 1S7»; A.M. Stewart, London. 1887: T.Zit«- 

kr T. iionu uwf •«•>>* Sitirift nm dtrlitttl Ulvpia, Bttma- 

bufK. 1880; W. H. Hutlon, London. 1896; Slora ef 
Blatrd Thtmtai .V«n. bu a Wun of Ti/hum Convtnl. ib. 
19(M; D.Wtl, xxxviii. '2S~449. 

Episcopal bi.ihop of Sacramento; b. at Charleston, 
S. C, Apr. 0, 1861. He was graduated from the 
University of the South, Sewanee, Tenn. (1881), 
and at Berkeley Divinity School, Middlctown, Conn. 
{1S84}. He was ordered deacon in the some year 
and was advanced to the priesthood in 1885. After 
being curate of Christ Church, Hartford, Conn. 
(1SS4-85), he was rector of the Church of the Goo.1 
Shepherd, Nashua, Vt. (1885-S3) and of St. Luke's, 
San Francisco, Cal. (1883-98). In 1808 he was con- 
secrated first bishop of Sacramento. He has writ- 
ten What in Chriatianityt (Milw'aukee, 1S87), and 
Tht Church or the Churchu, Which t (1894). 

HORELSCHIKI, mo"-reI-tshi'ki (" Immob- 
torn ") : \ fanatical dissenting sect of Siberia and 
other parts of Russia, so called from their practise 
of voluntary suicide in a pit filled with combusti- 
bles on fire. Such a death is believed to irib-ure a 
happy immortality. The ceremony of self-iniino- 
latton takes place once a year in a retired spot. 

gregatiotialist; b. at Tcibury (22 m. n.c. of Bris- 
tol), Gloucestershire, Dec. 9, 1863. He was edu- 
cated at the Douglas School, Cheltenham, from 
which he was graduated in 1881, and after teach- 
ing in the Islington Wesleyan day schools in Bir- 
mingham in 1882, and being ma.$tcr in the Jewish 
Collegiate School, Birmingham (1883-86), was a 
mission pn'aclier (1886-S8). In 1889 he was or- 
dained to the ministry of his denomination, and 
held pastorates at Stone. Staffordshire (1880-91), 
Rugeley, Staffonishire (1891-93), Westminster 
Road. Birmingham (1893-07), and New Court, 
ToUington Park, London (1897-1901). He was 
then Northfield Bible Conference Extension leo- 
turer from 1901 to 1904, and since 1904 has been 
pastor of the Westminster Congregational Cliapel, 
Buckingham Gate, London. He has written: Dis- 
ciplealtip (London, 1897); The Hidden YeaTs at 
Natareth (189S); Ood't Mrlhods jmth Man (1898); 
IfAerinnr(189S); ii/e'sProifm** (1899); TheSpirU 
of God (1900): The Ten Commandments (I90U; 
Corf's Perfect WiU (1901); A FirtU Centvry Mestage 
to Twfntidh Century Cirwivans (1902); True Esti- 
mate of Life and How to Live (1903); Evangtiitm 
(1904); Critet of the Christ (1905); To Die ia 
Gnin (1Q03); Tiie FulfiUme^ of Life (ims,); The 
Practice of Prayer (1006); The PanMa of the Kim/- 
dom (1907); The Simfie Things of the Christian 
Life (1907); Christian Prindpk* (1908); T'Ae A7i«- 
sionary Maniffsla (1000); and The Teaching of the 
Lemon: Commrnlary on the Internalioiuil Sundai/ 
School Leisonsfor . . . 1310 (1909). 

MORGAN, THOMAS: English Deist; d. 1743. 
He was of Welsh descent and was educated at the 
expense of hia friends. In 1716 he became pastor 
of a Presbyterian church at Marlborough, Wiltshire. 
Though very orthodox at the time, he soon after 
adopted Arion views, and was dismissed. He then 
lock up the study of medicine, practised in Bristol, 

Xorffaaatio Karriairo 



and then went to London to take up literary work. 
He wa8 known vm a free-thinker and styled liimsolf 
** Christian Deist." He left numerous writings, the 
principal of wliich was the theological work, The 
Moral PhiloaopheTy in a Dialogue between Phila^ 
letheSf a Christian Deistf and Theophanes, a Chris- 
tian Jew (London, 1737-40). See Deism, I., { 7. 

Bibuoorapht: The literature under Dkism, and DNB, 
xxxix. 35-36. 

L, S 10. 

MORIAH (" appearance of Jehovah ") : The hill 
upon which Abraham was to offer Isaac, according 
to divine direction (Gen. xxii. 2), and on which, later, 
the temple was built (II Chron. iii. 1). By " the 
land of Moriah,'' in the first passage, is meant the 
" land in which Mount Moriah was '' (cf. ^* the land 
of Jazer," Num. xxxii. 1). Moriah was probably 
not the usual desigimtion of the temple hill, because 
it docs not occur in the pre-exiliau books. See 


MORISON, JAMES: Scotch Secession Church, 
theologian and founder of the Evangelical Union; 
b. at Bathgate (17 m. w. of Edinburgh) Feb. 14, 
1810; d. at Glasgow Nov. 13, 1893. He was the 
son of Robert Morison, minister of the Secession 
Church of Bathgate; received his early education 
at the parish school and the academy of the town; 
entered the University of Edinburgh in 1830, prov- 
ing an excellent student and a prizeman in many 
of his studies; studied theology in the Theological 
Hall of the United Secession Church, and while 
there was especially influenced by Prof. John Brown, 
then occupying the chair of exegetical theology, 
though his independent and liberal habit of thought 
brought him into conflict with the teaching of other 
professors. He was licensed as a probationer May 
7, 1839, and his first appointment was to the par- 
ish of Cabrach, west of Aberdeen, the congregation 
of which was composed of agriculturists. To meet 
their needs he adopted a simple and direct dealing 
with the hearers of his sermons. In liis studies of 
the Scriptures for practical purposes he discovered 
that he could preach that Christ died for all men, 
and that each was authorized to say ** Christ loved 
me and gave himself for me." A wi(le-sprea<l re- 
vival of religion was the result. Morison became 
an evangelist and his service was sought in many 
parts of the north of Scotland. To meet the demand 
made upon him by letters and otherwise for in- 
struction he published a short tract entitled The 
Question, " What must I do to be savetl f " Answered 
(1840), in which he advocated the doctrine of a uni- 
versal atonement, and this was regarded as a de- 
parture from the creed of his Church. On Apr. 
14, 1840, he received a call from Clerks Lane Seces- 
sion Church, Kilmarnock, wliich he accepte<l. On 
Oct. 1, 1840, the presbytery met to ordain him, 
when he was severely taken to task for the publi- 
cation referre<l to. Some of the members refused 
to go on with the ordination, until he promised to 
suppress the offending tract. Their scruples were 
overcome by his promise to withdraw the publica- 

tion from sale, and the service was carried through. 
Under his ministry the church became crowded 
and the center of a religious movement, the in- 
fluence of which was felt widely. By his labors 
with voice and pen the thoughts of thousands were 
turned to consider specially the doctrines of the 
third chapter of the Westminster Confession of 
Faith. Some of the older ministers became alarmed 
and steps were taken to silence the young man who 
preached that Christ died for all men^ and that 
through faith in him the worst sinner might have 
eternal life. He was arraigned before the presby- 
tery on Mar. 2, 1841, on two charges: first, for 
teaching, among other doctrines, a universal atone- 
ment; and, second, for not having legally prevented 
a gentleman in London from publishing his tract. 
He was admonished and suspended from the exer- 
cise of his ministry until he should retract his errors, 
upon which he protested and appealed to the synod, 
the highest court of the Secession Church. This ena- 
bled him to continue his work, and in this he was 
supported by his whole congregation. The synod met 
in (Glasgow on June 8, 1841, and the issue was that 
he was expelled from the United Secession Church. 
The controversy produced by the trial affected the 
whole of Scotland, and the conduct of the synod in 
condemning the doctrine of a universal atonement 
led many to consider other doctrines of the West- 
minster Confession as well. Morison continued to 
minister to his flock with renewed energy and in- 
creased success. His own doctrinal views became 
more liberal. The conclusion he came to shortly 
afterward was that God, Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit, desired and provided the means for the sal- 
vation of all men, and if any were not saved it was 
because they resisted the Holy Spirit and refused 
to believe the Gospel. In 1843 Morison, with a few 
other ministers, originated the Evangelical Union 
(q.v.) for the purpose of combining the churches 
which had been formed to preach and defend his 
views of divine truth. A theological hall was in- 
stituted for the training of young men for the min- 
istry, of which he was the principal and professor 
of New-Testament exegesis from 1843 till his death 
in 1893. He became also the pastor of North Dun- 
das Street Evangelical Union Church, Glasgow, 
1851, and retained the pastorate till his death. 

Dr. Morison was an extensive author. His early 
writings were largely practical and controversial. 
Besides a number of pamphlets, he published: The 
Nature of the Atonement (Glasgow, 1841); The Ex^ 
tent of the Atonement (1841); Saving Faith (1842); 
Lectures on the Ninth Chapter of . . , Romans 
(Kilmarnock, 1849); A Critical Exposition of the 
Third Chapter of , , . Romans (London, 1866); 
a commentary on Matthew (1870) and one on Mark 
(1873); St. Paul's Teaching on Sanctification (1886); 
Sheaves of Ministry (1890). The Evangelical Re- 
pository; A Quarterly Magazine of Theological Lit- 
erature was edited and in great part written by Dr. 
Morison (1854-67). William Adamson. 

BiBLioaRAPnr: BioRraphies have been written by W. 
Adamson, Ix)n<lon. 1898; and O. Smeaton, Etlinburgh, 
1901. Consult ftirther: F. FerKUwn, HUt. of the Evan- 
grlicfil Union. Cilasgow, 1876; AfcnuMrial Volume of the 
Mininter'tal Jubilee of Principal Morieon, 1889; DyS, 
xxxix. 67-58. 


Xorffanatio Xarrla^ 

I. Official (Mormon) Statement. 

Joseph Smith; Early Life and \'u- 
iODS (} 1). 

Founding of the Church; First 
Period (f 2). 

Movement to Utah (§ 3). 

The ** Utah War " (5 4). 

Doctrines and Organisation (f 5). 

Pol3rKamy; Conflicta with the Gov- 
ernment (f 6). 
II. Critical (Non-Mormon) Statement. 

The Foimder's Family; Environ- 
ment in Youth (f 1). 

Translation of the Book of Mormon 


Summary of the Book of Mormon (J 3). 
ltd Literary Character ((4). 
Theories of its Source (( 5). 
The Foimder's Character; Opportunism 

The New Church; Various Centers 

Industrial Development; Opposition 

(5 8). 
Developing Organisation; Missionary 

Operations ($9). 
History, 1836-38 (J 10). 
Nauvoo Period; Polygamy; Smith's 

Death (f 11). 
Brigham Yoimg; Removal to Utah 

(I 12). 

Defiance of the United States 
(§ 13). 

Suppression of Polygamy; State- 
hood (f 14). 

Late History; Present Status 
(§ 15). 

Doctrinal System (( 16). 

Ordinances in Theory and Practise 
(5 17). 

Priesthood and Government ((18). 

III. The Reorganised (Jhurch of Jesus 

Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

IV. Anti-Mormon Movements. 
To 1860 (f 1). 

From 1869 to the Present (( 2). 

L Official (Mormon) Statement: The Church 
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly 
called the " Mormon " Church, was organized Apr. 
6, 1830, at Fayette, Seneca County, N. Y. Joseph 
Smith, its founder, was born at Sharon, 
I. Joseph Windsor County, Vt., Dec. 23, 1805, 
Smith; and moved with his parents in 1815 
Early to Palmyra, Wayne County, N. Y., 
Life and and in 1819 to Manchester, N. Y. In 
Visions, the year 1820 a number of protracted 
revival meetings were held at tliat 
place among the various sects, which resulted in 
contention among the preachers who sought to in- 
fluence the new converts to join their respective 
churches. Some of the members of the Smith fam- 
ily had joined the Presbyterian church, but Joseph, 
then fourteen years of age, being unable to decide 
which of these sects was right, held aloof from all, 
but pondered upon the matter, knowing that all 
could not be right. One day, while thus reflecting, 
he opened the Bible at the epistle of James and 
was deeply impressed with the promise in i. 5: *' If 
any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that 
giveth to all men liberally, and upbraidcth not; 
and it shall be given him.'' Tliis passage aroused 
his earnest attention and deep reflection, until he 
decitled to take it literally. Accordingly he re- 
tired to the woods near his father's hoase and 
called upon the Ijord in fervent prayer; wliile thus 
engaged he beheld two glorious personages wrapped 
in a brilliant light, standing near, but above him 
in the air. One of them spoke to him, calling him 
by name, and, pointing to the other, said, " This is 
my beloved son, hear him." As soon as he was 
able to speak, Joseph asked this personage which 
of all the sects of Christendom he should join, and 
was told to join none of them, for they were all 
WTong; that the people drew near to the Lord with 
their lips, but their hearts were far from him. 
Among other things he was taught that the Gospel 
of Christ in its power and simplicity was not among 
men; but that shortly it should be restored again. 
The vision closed and the youth was left to ponder 
over the things he had both seen and heard. Three 
years passed and on the evening of Sept. 21, 1823, 
after be had retired for the night, he engaged in 
prayer; while thus calling upon the Lord, the room 
wus filled with light and suddenly a messenger ap- 
pealed at his lj>edside clothed in glory beyond de- 
ficription, \%'ho called him by name and said he had 
U«fl sent from the presence of God, that his name 

was Moroni, that God had a work for Joseph to do, 
and that his name should be had for good and evil 
among all nations, kindred, and tongues. The 
angel declared that the Gospel in all its fulness was 
about to be restored, preparatory to the second 
advent of Messiah, which was near at hand, and 
that this young man had been chosen as an instru- 
ment in the hands of the Lord in bringing about 
his purposes in the latter days. He was also in- 
formed that there was a record written on gold 
plates giving an account of the former inhabitants 
of the American continent, and the source from 
whence they sprang. These plates contained the 
fulness of the everlasting Gospel as delivered by 
the Savior to the inhabitants of this continent 
whom he visited after his resurrection; also there 
were two stones in silver bows deposited with the 
reconi, constituting what is called the Urim and 
Thummim which God had prepared for the pur- 
pose of translating the characters on the record. 
These stones were fastened to a breastplate. He 
was permitted to see these things in vision, also the 
place of deposit in the hill Cumorah, near Palmyra, 
N. Y. After receiving many visits from the angel, 
who unfolded to him many of the events about to 
take place, he received the plates on Sept. 22, 1827. 
These he subsequently translated through the me- 
dium of the Urim and Thummim and " the gift and 
power of God," which translation was published in 
1830 as the Book of Mormon. 

In 1829 Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery re- 
ceived the priesthood, which is divine authority, 
under the hands of Peter, James, and John, and by 
command of God, on Apr. 6, 1830, they 
2. Fotmd- organized the Church of Jesus Christ 
ing of the of Latter-day Saints with six souls. 
Church; The next 3rear the church numbered 
First several hundred members and moved 
Period, to Kirtland, O., and also began to set- 
tle in Jackson County, Mo., where, ac- 
cording to their belief, the city Zion was to be built, 
a holy city with a temple of surpassing splendor, 
erected for the salvation of the souls of men. In 
1833 the Saints who had located in Missouri were 
driven from Jackson County; they had incurred 
the ill-will of the original settlers, partly on ac- 
count of their religion and partly because they were 
abolitionists from the eastern states. They sought 
refuge in Clay County, where they were permitted 
to remain for a short time, but the opposition in- 
creased and they were forced to seek a home in the 




more thinly settled counties of Daviess and Cald- 
well, also in that state. In 1839 Gov. Lilbum W. 
Boggs issued an exterminating order against the 
Latter-day Saints. Their prophet (Joseph Smith) 
and leading men were cast in prison and the peo- 
ple, after being forced to deed away their property, 
were driven from the state. In this destitute con- 
dition — having been robbed and plimdered of all 
they possessed — they went to Illinois, where in 
1839-40, on the site of a previous settlement called 
Conmieroe, in Hancock County, they established 
the city of Nauvoo. The legislature granted them 
a liberal charter and the city grew rapidly, soon 
numbering several thousand inhabitants with over 
2,000 comfortable homes. A temple was built ac- 
cording to plans their prophet claimed were re- 
vealed to him, and the work of salvation for the 
dead conunenced. It is a teaching of the Saints 
that the Savior visited the spirits in prison, while 
his body was in the tomb, and taught them the 
Gospel. For this reason the Latter-day Saint«, in 
their temples, perform by proxy the rites of salva- 
tion, such as baptism, in behalf of the dead who 
die without a knowledge of the Gospel. 

In 1844 a number of discontented parties, who 
had left the chiu'ch, issued a paper at Nauvoo called 
the Expositor, in which the prophet, Joseph Smith, 
was bitterly assailed. The city council passed an 

ordinance declaring the printing-ofEce, 

3. Move- where this paper was published, a 

ment to nuisance, and it was destroyed by offi- 

Utah. oers of the law. Joseph Smith was 

blamed for maintaining this nuisance, 
and a warrant was issued for his arrest. He de- 
clared that if he were taken he would be killed, 
and therefore, with his elder brother Hyrimi and 
a few faithful friends, crossed the Mississippi River 
for the purpose of going to the Rocky Mountains. 
This action created much excitement among some 
of his followers who declared that in time of danger 
he was fleeing from the flock. His reply to these 
was, " If my life is of no value to my friends, it is 
of none to myself.'' Returning to Nauvoo he sub- 
mitted to arrest, and with his brother Hyrum was 
taken to Carthage, the county seat of Hancock. 
There they were imprisoned. While thus confined 
and under pledge of protection by the governor, a 
mob surrounded the jail on June 27, 1844, over- 
powered the guard and shot to death Joseph and 
Hyrum Smith and severely wounded John Taylor. 
After the assassination the twelve apostles, under 
the leadership of Brigham Young, became the pre- 
siding quorum of the church, and by right of their 
authority assumed control and were sustained by 
the people. Instead of putting an end to '' Mor- 
monism " the assassination of the leaders only in- 
creased its membership, and it began to spread 
with renewed vigor. This caused the enemies of 
the Latter-day Saints to rage so fiercely that the 
Saints were again driven from their homes in 1846. 
Crossing the Mississippi River they made tempo- 
nuy settlements in the territory of Iowa and in the 
spring of 1847 the advance company of pioneers, 
under the leadership of Brigham Young, left Win- 
ter Quarters on the west side of the Missouri River 
near the present site of Omaha, for the Salt Lake 

Valley in search of a new home. They arrived at 
their destination Saturday, July 24, 1847, and de- 
cided to make it their permanent place of settle- 
ment. This little band remained in the valley for 
some time, planting, building, surveying, and pre- 
paring the foundation of a city. The soil they found 
parched and barren, save for the salt grass and 
sage-brush that aboimded everywhere; there were 
no trees excepting the scattering cotton-woods that 
hned the streams; but here they decided to re- 
main and trust in Providence. The soil was hard 
and dry, so the pioneers diverted the water of City 
Creek that it might moisten the ground which had 
for unknown ages remained in its primitive state. 
Before the smnmer was past most of the pioneers 
left the valley and returned to Winter Quarters to 
assist the Saints to gather to the Rocky Mountains. 
That autumn other companies arrived. Salt Lake 
City grew rapidly, and other settlements were 
formed until they were scattered over the face of 
the entire arid region. For a nimiber of years the 
Saints suffered extremely, being forced to boil raw- 
hides and dig sego and thistle roots for subsistence. 
Shortly after the settlement of Salt Lake Valley, 
the " Mormons " set up the " provisional govern- 
ment of the State of Deseret," and petitioned Con- 
gress for admission into the Union. In 1850 the 
territory of Utah was created and 
4. The Brigham Young appointed governor. 
" Utah Four years later Col. E. J. Steptoe, of 
War." the United States Army, was ap- 
pointed to succeed him but declined, 
and Brigham Young was reappointed for a second 
term. Most of the territorial officers were non-resi- 
dents and were unfriendly to the ** Mormons," 
which caused considerable friction. Reports were 
carried to Washington to the effect that the people 
in the territory were in rebellion, had no respect for 
law, and had burned the public court records. In- 
fluenced by these false reports, and without an in- 
vestigation, the president of the United States 
ordered an army to Utah to suppress the " rebel- 
lion." This is known in history as " The Utah 
War," or " Buchanan's blunder." Alfred Cum- 
mings, who had been appointed governor to suc- 
ceed Brigham Young, came with the army. When 
the Latter-day Saints learned that the army was 
on the way to suppress a supposed rebellion, their 
indignation knew no bounds; they were filled with 
alarm and forebodings of evil. The reports carried 
to the president they knew to be false and his ac- 
tion unjustifiable. Many times they had been 
driven and plundered by mobs under the guise of 
law, therefore they resolved that they would resist 
what they felt to be an unlawful invasion by a 
hostile force. When the army approached the 
borders the " Mormons " harassed it and burned 
some of the supplies and in this way prevented it 
from entering the territory before winter set in. The 
Saints were determined, if forced to flee again, to 
leave their lands as barren as they had found them, 
not permitting their oppressors to reap the fruits 
of their labors. As the army neared the valley, the 
people moved southward, taking with them a few 
necessary articles and provisions, leaving guards 
behind with instructions to bum all dwellings and 




destnictible property and lay the country waste, 
should the army enter the valley with hostile in- 
tentions. By the interference of friends, however, 
the difficulties were adjusted. Governor Cwoor 
mings entered the valley in advance of the army 
and was received with due respect and considera- 
tion. A few days later, after investigating matters, 
he sent a truthful report to the president in relation 
to affairs in Utah. A peace conunission was sent 
snd met with President Young and others in June, 
1858, and peacefully concluded the unfortunate 
and unhappy difficulties. The army, imder com- 
mand of Gen. Albert Sidney Johnston, entered Salt 
Lake Valley June 26, 1868, and camped on the 
west side of the Jordan River; sub^uently it 
marched to Cedar Valley, about forty miles south 
of Salt Lake City, and there located Camp Floyd. 
It remained in Utah until the breaking out of the 

In 1877 Brigham Young died and was succeeded 
in the presidency of the church by John Taylor, 
who was severely wounded at Carthage when Joseph 
and Hsrrum Smith were killed. President Taylor 
died in 1887 and was succeeded by Wilford Wood- 
ruff, who, in 1890, issued the manifesto prohibiting 
plural marriages in the church. He died in 1898 
and was succeeded by Lorenzo Snow, who died 
Oct. 10, 1901. Joseph F. Smith, nephew of the 
prophet Joseph Smith, is the present presiding offi- 
cer. The membership of the church is about 400,- 
000 and the headquarters are in Salt Lake City. 

The " Mormons " believe in the Trinity, Father, 
Son, and Holy Spirit, as three separate personages, 
infinite and eternal; that men will be punished for 
their own sins and not suffer the penalty of Adam's 
transgression; that Christ atoned for 
5. Doc- original sin and that all mankind, 
trines and through the atonement of Christ, may 
Organiza- be saved by obedience to the princi- 
tkm. pies of his Gospel, of which faith in 
God, repentance from sin, baptism by 
immersion for the remission of sin, and the laying 
on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit, are 
eesential. They believe that little children who die 
are redeemed without baptism through the blood 
of Christ which was shed for them, and that men 
must be called of God and ordained by those who 
hoki authority to officiate in order to preach the 
Gospel and administer acceptably in its ordinances. 
The church oi^ganization comprises the officers found 
in the primitive Church, and they believe in the 
gifts of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, the 
divine power of healing, and all the gifts and bless- 
ings exertrised by the Savior and his apostles. They 
accept the Bible as the word of God, and the Book 
of Mormon also as the word of God given to the 
ancient inhabitants of the American continent. 
They believe that God does now reveal to his peo- 
ple many things as in days of old; that the heavens 
are not sealed, but that many important things are 
yet to he r^veaied pertaining to the kingdom of 
God; in the literal gathering of Israel; in the res- 
toration of the ten tribes; that Jerusalem will be 
rebuilt' that Zion shall be established on the Amer- 
ican continent, and that the Savior, in the millen- 
nium will reign personally on the earth, which 

shall eventually become a celestial sphere and the 
eternal abode of the righteous. The president of 
the church is the supreme authority in all church 
matters and acts in concert with two counselors, or 
advisors, forming the presiding quonmi of the 
church. Next to them stand the twelve apostles, 
then patriarchs, high priests, seventies, elders, 
bishops, priests, teachers, and deacons, all of whom 
have specific duties to perform and work in har- 
mony with the whole. 

At one time the ** Mormons " taught and prac- 
tised the doctrine of plural marriage, holding the 
doctrine to be entirely Biblical and that the revela- 
tion concerning the same was received 
6. Polyg- by Joseph Smith, but was withheld 
amy; Con- from the body of the church in general 
flicts with and from the world till they were settled 
the Gov- in Utah. After 1852 plural marriage 
emment was preached and practised openly 
and most of the leading men were 
polygamists. In 1862 a law was enacted by Con- 
gress against the practise, but little attention was 
paid to it for many years. In 1884 the supreme 
court of the United States declared the law against 
plural marriage constitutional, and more than 1,000 
*' Mormon " men were convicted and sent to the 
penitentiary, while others fled or went into hiding. 
In 1887 Congress disincorporated the church, con- 
fiscated its property, with the exception of $50,000, 
and, finally, in Sept., 1890, after the vast property 
holdings of the church had been lost, Pres. Wilford 
Woodruff issued his manifesto against plural mar- 
riages and since that time they have not been per- 
mitted by the church, though many of the men who 
entered into these relations before that time have 
continued to support and care for their families, 
feeling that these obligations could not be dis- 
carded. Statehood was granted to Utah in 1896 
and plural marriage was prohibited forever by law 
in the state. The " Mormons " have four temples 
erected at a cost of over six millions of dollars. The 
Salt Lake Tabernacle is 250 feet long, 150 feet wide, 
80 feet high, with a wooden roof without any sup- 
porting pillars. Its great organ and choral services 
are among the remarkable features; services are 
held each sabbath day, and the building will seat 
comfortably 7,000 souls. Joseph F. Smith, Jr. 

n. Critical (Non-Mormon) Statement: The early 
history of Mormonism has its center in the person 
of its founder. Joseph Smith was the fourth among 
ten children. His father was a man 
z. The of unstable, restless disposition. He 
Founder's had no settled occupation, but tried 
Family; his fortune — always without success — 
Environ- at various pursuits, and was a believer 
ment in in witchcraft. Occasionally he gained 
Youth, money by fortune-telling and selling 
blessings. The prophet's mother was 
superior to the father in intelligence and force of 
will, but not less ignorant, and a firm believer in 
supernatural visions, apparitions, and dreams, also 
in cures by faith. Moreover, both the grandfathers 
of the prophet were much given to religious super- 
stition. These facts are not without significance 
for the understanding of Smith's personality and 
activity. After many changes of residence in Ver- 




mont and New Hampshire his father removed with 
the family in 1815 to Pahnyra, in Wayne (then a 
part of Ontario) County, N. Y., and after about 
four years to a farm near Manchester. Here their 
reputation was no better. They were considered 
deficient in honor and veracity, though not as posi- 
tively malicious. The boys were lazy and roving, 
several of them could not read. Joseph lyas un- 
kempt and inmioderately lazy. He could read, 
though not without difficulty, wrote a very imper- 
fect hand, and had a limited understanding of ele- 
mentary arithmetic. The evolution of such a boy 
into the prophet and founder of a new religion is a 
highly interesting psychological problem, which 
can not be solved without a knowledge of his an- 
cestry, of his mental peculiarities, and of his early 
environment. Four years after the vision of the 
plates (see I., § 1 above) he claimed to have been 
led to the spot and to have received from the angel 
the golden plates. They were covered with small 
and beautifully engraved characters in " reformed 
Egyptian." Joseph received besides a pair of crys- 
tals set in silver rings, a sort of supernatural spec- 
tacles, the veritable Urim and Thununim of the Old 
Testament, without which the mysterious writing 
could not be translated. 

The first person to take an active interest in the 
Golden Bible was a farmer, Martin Harris, who had 
been in turn Quaker, Univerealist, Baptist, and 
Presbyterian, but always a dreamer 
2. Transla- and fanatic, and aflSrmed that he had 
tion of the visited the moon. Smith needed finan- 
Book of cial help in order to publish his book. 
Mormon, which Harris was ready to grant, if 
only he could be fully convinced that 
the book was from God. He wished to see the 
golden plates; but Smith, with the help of a special 
revelation, was able to make him content to believe 
without seeing. The prophet, however, made a 
copy of some of the letters found on the plates. 
These " caractors" Harris showed to Prof. Charles 
Anthon in New York, whose warnings were unable 
to shake the new disciple's confidence. Harris now 
became Smith's first amanuensis in the translation 
of the Golden Bible. When he had written 116 
pages, Harris' unbelieving wife destroyed them. 
Smith doubted whether the sheets had been actu- 
ally destroyed, and was therefore for some time in 
embarrassment, until he was instructed by reveliv- 
tion that the translation had fallen into the hands 
of godless persons, whom Satan had inspired to 
alter the words. He was therefore directed not to 
translate again what was lost; he should instead 
translate from the plates of Nephi, which con- 
tained a more detailed account than the book of 
Lehi, the source of the first translation. Smith now 
made his wife his amanuensis until the appearance 
of Oliver Cowdery, who became his first secretary. 
Cowdery had been a blacksmith, but had acquired 
a measure of knowledge sufficient to enable him to 
become a schoolmaster. The work of translating 
proceeded in the following manner: A curtain was 
drawn across the room in order to shield the holy 
document from profane eyes; seated behind the 
curtain, Smith, with the help of the Urim and Thum- 
mim, read from the golden plates to Cowdery, who 

wrote down the translation sentence for sentence. 
The translation of tins, the *' Book of Mormon," 
was begun at Manchester soon after the alleged dis- 
covery of the golden plates, continued at Har- 
mony, Pa., and finished at Fayette, N. Y., June, 
1829. Before the work was finished. Smith and 
Cowdery were ordained by heavenly messengers 
to the Aaronic and Melchiscdec priesthood; to the 
first by John the Baptbt, to the latter by the apos- 
tles Peter, James, and John. The Aaronic priest- 
hood gave them the authority to preach repentance 
and faith and to baptize by immersion for the re- 
mission of sins. The Melchisedec priesthood gave 
them the power to impart the Holy Ghost to the 
baptized through the laying on of hands. This 
power, the Mormons say, could at that time be im- 
parted only by heavenly messengers; the true 
Church had utterly ceased to exist upon earth; 
there was no one who had the Holy Spirit. With 
Harris' help Smith had the book printed in the year 
1830 in an edition of 5,000 copies. As the sale was 
slow at first, Harris forfeited his property; though 
within ten years two more editions were published. 
Prefixed to the book is the sworn statement of 
CJowdery, Whitmer, and Harris that they had seen 
the plates; moreover, the testimony of eight other 
men that they had both seen and handled them. 
The Rev. John Alonzo Clark once put the question 
to Harris: ** Did you see the plates with your nat- 
ural eyes just as you see the penholder in my hand? " 
Harris replied: " Well, I did not see them just as 
I see the penholder, but I saw them with the eye 
of faith. I saw them as plainly as I see anything 
whatever about me, although at the time it was 
covered with a cloth " (Gleanings by the Way, Phila- 
delphia, 1842). A few years later all of the " three " 
witnesses fell away from Mormonism and declared 
their previous testimony to be false. 

The book of Mormon contains about one-half as 

much matter as the Old Testament, and in respect 

of style is a crude imitation of the his- 

3. Sum- torical and prophetic books. About 
mary of the one-eighteenth of the book is taken 

Book of directly from the Bible, about 300 

Mormon, passages, namely, large portions of 
Isaiah, the entire Sermon on the Mount 
(according to Matthew), and a few verses fromjPaul. 
There are passages also which betray a dependence 
upon other books, such as the Westminster (IJonfes- 
sion of Faith and the Methodist Discipline. The 
work is divided into fifteen books, which purport to 
have been written by as many different hands, con- 
taining a " Sacred History of Ancient America 
from the Earliest Ages after the Flood to the Be- 
ginning of the Fifth Ontury of the Christian Era." 
Smith himself has summarized its contents as fol- 

" The history of America is unfolded from its first settle- 
ment by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel to the 
beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are 
informed by these records that America, in ancient times, 
has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The 
first were called Jaro<lites, and came directly from the Tower 
of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of 
Jerusalem, about 600 before Christ. The Jarcdites were 
destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jeru- 
salem. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle 
toward the close of the fourth century. The remnant are 




the Indians. This book alao tcUs us that our Savior made 
his appearance upon this continent after his resurrection; 
thai he planted the Gospel here in all its fulness and rich- 
ness and power and blessing, that the inhabitants had apos- 
ties, prophets, pastors, teachers, and evangelists; the same 
order, the same priesthood, the same ordinances, gifts, 
powers, and bleraing as was enjoyed on the Eastern conti- 
nmt; that the people were cut o£F in consequence of their 
transgressions; that the last of their prophets [Mormon] 
who existed among them was commanded to write an 
abridgment of their prophecies, history, etc., and to hide 
it in the earth." 

In the last da3rs the Book of Mormon was to 
come to light, and, being joined with the Bible, 
was to serve the fulfihnent of the thoughts of God. 
Mormon was accordingly the collector and reviser of 
the books; his son, Moroni, brought the work to 
its completion and about the year 420 a.d. hid the 
plates under the stone on the hill Ciunorah. 

Judged as a Uterary work the Book of Mormon 
is tedious, utterly devoid of taste, poetic grace, and 
depth of thought, exhibiting no re- 
4. Its ligious inspiration or moral earnest- 
Literary ness. It is full of grammatical blun- 
Character, dcrs and teems with anachronisms. 
In the matter of doctrine the book — 
compared with the later revelations called forth by 
the exigencies that arose in the course of the sys- 
tem's development — contains little that is markedly 
characteristic. It foretells the call of Joseph Smith 
to be the prophet of the latter day; it is strictly 
chiliastic, and declares that all gifts, powers, and 
offices of the apostolic Church are to be found in 
the true church; it acknowledges the doctrine of 
the Trinity, rejects infant baptism, and commands 
baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; it 
asserts that the Bible is from God, but also that this 
fact does not exclude further revelations; finally, it 
contains three passages which, naturally interpreted, 
must be understood as condemning polygamy. 

The question of the source of the Book of Mor- 
mon b important. For Mormon believers there is, 
of course, no problem here. The ma- 
5. Theories jority of anti-Mormon critics have ao- 
of Its cepted the so-called Spaulding-Rigdon 
Sotirce. theory of the origin. Much of the 
more recent criticism, however, tends 
to establish the theory of Smith's authorship. The 
Spaulding-Kigdon theory is, in brief, as follows: 
About the year 1809 there lived in Conneaut, O., a 
man named Solomon Spaulding. He had studied 
at Dartmouth College and had served some years 
as a Presbjrtcrian minister. Later he took up a 
secular calling and devoted a part of his time to 
htcrary pursuits. Becoming interested in the In- 
dian antiquities in the neighborhood of Cbnneaut 
he conceived the idea of a romance about the In- 
dians before the discovery of America by Coliunbus. 
The work which he compascd was finished about 
1812, and bore the title, *' The Manascript Found." 
Spaulding availed himself of the well-known fable 
that the American Indians are the descendants of 
the lost trilx's of Israel. To make his narrative 
more piquant he gave it the form of a translation 
of a manuscript composeil by a member of an an- 
cient tribe and recently discovered in an Indian 
mound. Spaulding took his manuscript to Pitts- 
burg, intending to have it printed there. It lay a 

considerable time in a printing-office, but was never 
printed. At last it was returned to the author, who 
at the time was Uving at Amity, Pa., where in 1816 
he died. When the Book of Mormon appeared, 
Spaulding's widow and others, who had heard him 
read from his manuscript, declared that the book 
must have been taken in large part from the unpub- 
lished romance, with many theological interpola- 
tions. As, however, Spaulding's manuscript could 
never be found, a direct comparison with the Book 
of Mormon was impossible. (A manuscript dis- 
covered in Honolulu in 1885, which purported to be 
Spaulding's Indian romance and bears no resem- 
blance to the Book of Mormon, is generally be- 
lieved to be a forgery.) Beyond these well-estab- 
lished facts the claim is that Sidney Rigdon, who 
from 1829 on stood in close relation to Smith, may 
have had access to the Spaulding manuscript when 
he was employed as a printer in Pittsburg about 
1812 and later, and may have made a copy of it 
and have placed the copy at Smith's disposal. This 
theory has been rendered fairly plausible by vari- 
ous external and internal evidences; yet the evi- 
dences fall far short of proof. Against the theory 
of Smith's authorship it has been urged that so ig- 
norant a man could not have produced the work. 
But it may be replied that only an ignorant man 
could have produced it. In intellectual grasp and 
force Smith's later (well authenticated) utterances 
surpass it, but they resemble it in style. The style 
and contents of the Book of Mormon are such as 
one might expect from a man of Smith's peculiar 
nature and surroundings. He possessed a power- 
ful, though prosaic, imagination, and a retentive 
memory; but his knowledge was slight and his 
judgment weak. From beginning to end the book 
exhibits these traits. The author — perhaps un- 
consciously — derived what he said from various 
and in part mutually opposed sources. Hence the 
confusion in his theology, which is wanting in con- 
sistency. Doctrines of the most various origin are 
illogically thrown together. Calvinism, Universal- 
ism, Methodism, chiliasm, Catholicism, deism, and 
freemasonry are discussed — though not by name — 
and this in a manner that strikingly corresponds 
to Smith's relations to these systems. The book is 
in a measure a mirror of the time, but in a still 
greater measure a sort of (unconscious) autobiog- 
raphy. At the same time there is no necSessity to 
disallow evidence that the general idea — ^and even 
the framework — of the book was derived from an ex- 
ternal source. The main contention is that what 
is really characteristic and personal in the book is 
from Smith himself. 

Was Joseph Smith a deliberate falsifier and con- 
scious impostor? Most non-Mormon writers answer 
this question with an emphatic affirm- 
6. The ative. Some of the most careful in- 
Fotmder's vestigators, however (especially Sten- 
Character; house and Riley), believe that he was 
Oppor- in a large measure the victim of his 
tunism. own hallucinations — that he really l>e- 
lieved himself an inspired prophet. 
That he also practised wilful deception in order to 
carry out his purposes can hardly be questioned. 
Had he been a mere impostor, he must have broken 




down under the storm of persecution that came 
upon him. Smith had success as a prophet and as 
the founder of a new religion because the soil was 
prepared for it. From the beginning the drawing 
power of Mormonism lay in its claim to possess the 
gift of prophecy. And as the burden of the proph- 
ecy is the promise of material advantage and sensu- 
ous enjoyment and glory in the " latter day " and 
eternally — and withal offered easy conditions as to 
repentance and inward renewal — it is not hard to 
see how the enthusiasm that first drew followers to 
Joseph Smith has continued to be the great ani- 
mating force of Mormonism. Smith began his 
career as " Peep-stone Joe " and developed into the 
" prophet, seer, and revealer " of the Latter-day 
Saints. After attaining to this dignity he was ever 
ready with a fresh revelation to meet each new 
emergency. Smith and his successors have been 
the ideal opportunists. In his prophesyings, how- 
ever. Smith practised self-restraint: " We never 
inquire at the hand of God for special revelation 
only in case of there being no previous revelation 
to suit the case " (Times and Seasons, V., 753). 
Revelations were uttered pertaining to almost every 
conceivable concern except, perhaps, religion 

The formal foimding of the new sect took place 
Apr. 6, 1830, in Fayette, N. Y. At that time it 
numbered some seventy adherents. 
7. The Its official name was fixed somewhat 
New later. By revelation Smith took the 
Church; title of " seer, translator, prophet. 
Various apostle of Jesus Christ, and elder of the 
Centers, church." He began a vigorous propa- 
ganda. Every convert was baptized — 
no previous baptism was recognized. Among the 
first notable converts were Pratt (author of The 
Voice of Warning) and Sidney Rigdon, the chief 
figure in early Mormon history after Smith him- 
self. As he found too little faith in the neighbor- 
hood of his home. Smith in 1831 removed with 
many of the " Saints " to Kirtland, 0., w^hither 
Rigdon had already preceded him. The object in 
view was to find the land of promise, to establish 
therein a theocracy with the prophet as God's 
mouthpiece and vicegerent, and to build up a new 
city of Zion in preparation for the glory of the latter 
day. To realize this object four successive attempts 
were made in as many places: at Kirtland, O.; 
Far West (now Independence), Mo.; Nauvoo, 111., 
and finally in Utah. In the first three places ex- 
traordinary temporary success was followed by so 
fierce and determined opposition on the part of the 
surrounding '^ Gentiles " that the saints could 
make no effectual resistance. That in Utah they 
have been able not only to hold their groimd, but 
also to prosper greatly is to be ascribed to prior 
possession and isolation, together with an improved 
organisation and a saner leadership. The sucoee- 
sive settlements of the Mormons represent, in gea- 
eral, stages not only of outward progress but also 
of inner development. At ffirtland the new sect 
met with immediate and striking suooeM: its mia- 
BioDariee displayed immense leal and ehonliBa 
founded in Ohio, Fenn^^n***^ 
ana, and Illinois. Witfa 

removal to Kirtland the number of the Mormons 
grew to at least 1,200 souls. Here Sidney Rigdon 
became prominent. He had assimilated some of 
the ideas of Fourier, the French ooUectivist. Fol- 
lowing a special revelation of February, in 1831, the 
Kirtland saints began to oi^anize communal busi- 
ness ventures, in which, for a time, they met with 

The opposition, however, of the " unbelievers " 

about them caused Smith to turn his eyes toward 

the Western bounds of civilization, in 

8. Indus- order to find there a place where he 

trial Devel- might without hindrance fully carry 
opment; out his views. In the autmnn of 1831 

Opposition, he founded a colony in Jackson County, 
Mo. A revelation had declared that 
here was the promised land and the place for the 
city of Zion. Large tracts of land were bought; 
the town of Far West, or Zion, was foimded, where 
the city of Independence now lies; a monthly and 
a weekly paper for the propagation of the new faith 
were established; and all the affairs of the colony 
were carried on with admirable zeal and vigor. 
Nevertheless, although continuing to regard Far 
West as the destined site for the city of Zion, Smith 
made Kirtland for an indefinite time the chief seat 
of the saints. Thither he returned in 1832. He 
now thrust the communion into various perilous 
business ventures, all under the control of the 
church and without adequate financial foimdation. 
In the summer of 1833 a temple was built at the 
cost of $40,000, and although most of the Saints 
gave one-seventh of their time to its construction, 
a debt of from $15,000 to $20,000 was left upon it. 
Very early the non-Mormons in the region about 
Kirtland began to show a bitter hostility toward 
the new sect. Their opposition had its root partly 
in religious differences and partly in their indigna- 
tion at Smith's domination in financial affairs that 
concerned the public at large. In May, 1832, a mob 
broke into the prophet's house, brought him into 
a neighboring field and tarred and feathered him. 
Rigdon suffered the same disgrace. Nothing 
daunted, however. Smith on the following day 
preached and baptized three converts, and after- 
ward continued to prosecute his various under- 
takings with enei^gy. 

In 1834 Smith organized the first high council 

of the church with himself, Rigdon, and Williams 

as the first presidency. In associating 

9. Develop- these men with himself in the highest 

ing Organ- office Smith did not make them in any 
ization; sense equal with himself. They were 

Missionary his coimselors, but both in prophesy- 

Operations. ing and in ruling he was to be uncon- 
ditionally supreme. In 1835 a further 
step in the development of the hierarchy was taken 
in the founding of the body of the twelve apostles. 
One of the twelve was Brigham Young, who be- 
came Smith's successor in the presidency. Young 
had become a Mormon about the end of 1832 and 
had already rendered important service in the 
elmroh by suppressing dissensions due to the proph- 
et's groidng profligacy. In 1836 the constitution 

-^ ftvtiwr dmlapod by the establishment of a 
-ral eoUMil for each district of the church 




(at that time Kirtland and Zion), called the " quo- 
rum of seventy." The various coimcils came to be 
called " quorums " — ^the first presidency, the twelve, 
the seventy. In 1837 the apostles Hyde and Kim- 
ball were sent as missionaries to England and South 
Wales, where they worked with remarkable suc- 
cess, especially among the laboring classes. After 
three years' labor they could count 4,019 Mormons 
in England alone. The report for June, 1851, gave 
a total of 30,747 adherents in the United Kingdom 
and further declared: " Within the last fourteen 
years more than 50,000 have been baptized in Eng- 
land, of whom nearly 17,000 have emigrated to 

The year 1836 was marked by the apostasy of 

some of the pillars of the church at Kirtland. The 

" three witnesses " (Cowdery, Whit- 

lo. History, mer, and Harris) to the Book of 

1836-38. Mormon were excommunicated along 
with other *' dissenters." There is 
evidence that while the Saints were yet in Kirt- 
land polygamy began to be practised by some 
of the leaders. Whether Smith privately sanc- 
tioned or condoned these practises is not quite 
certain. His ostensible efforts at their suppression 
lacked the vigor that generally characterized his 
actions. In the Book of Doctrine and Covenants 
(1835) he declared: '^ Inasmuch as this Church of 
Christ has been reproached with the crime of for- 
nication, and polygamy: we declare that we be- 
lieve that one man should have one wife; and one 
woman but one husband." In obedience to a rev- 
elation Smith in 1836 established a bank at Kirt- 
land, which about the beginning of 1838 became 
insolvent. Judicial procedure against the prophet 
and others was begun. At this moment, however. 
Smith and Rigdon in obedience to a revelation 
went to Missouri. The colony there had been hav- 
ing troublous times since 1834, when the prophet 
had removed various difficulties. Now, however, 
internal dissensions became serious, while the Gen- 
tiles* opposition grew increasingly fierce. From the 
banning the people of Missouri had resented the 
attitude of the Mormons as expressed (for example) 
in a passage in the Book of Commandments (1833) 
calling that state the ** land of your inheritance, 
which is now the land of your enemies." Already 
border-ruffianism had been manifested against the 
Mormons. A popular demand for the removal of 
the Mormons was met with temporizing on their 
|)art, and, as the governor's attempt to call out the 
militia to protect them was futile, a mob drove at 
least 1,500 of them northward across the Missouri 
River. These settled chiefly in Clay, Caldwell, and 
Daviess coimties. N^otiations for pecuniary re- 
dress proved fruitless; for conviction for violence 
committed against a Mormon could not be had in 
Jackson coimty. While the Mormons had been 
guilty of various offenses, non-Mormons were dis- 
posed to lay upon them the blame for any depre- 
dations when the authors were unknown, and so 
the Mormons suffered beyond their deserts. Not- 
withstanding, the town of Far West itself was, until 
1838, materially prosperous and on fairly good 
terms with the neighboring Gentiles. About this 
time, bowever, the presidency was charged with 

misappropriating trust fimds, and several prom- 
inent leaders forsook the church. About the same 
time there was formed an organization later called 
the Danite Band or the " Avenging Angels." Its 
members were bound by blood oaths to obey any 
behest of the church against property or life. In 
the same year also the tithing system was estab- 
lished, which ever since has been so important for 

The climax of the civil strife in Missouri seems 

to have been occasioned largely by a sermon of 

Rigdon's on July 4, 1838, which pre- 

iz. Nauvoo dieted a war of extermination between 

Period; Saints and Gentiles. Upon complaint 
Polygamy; to the governor that the Mormons in 

Smith's Caldwell and Daviess counties resisted 

Death, the execution of justice, a regiment of 
militia was called out; but the soldiery 
for the most part disbanded. Nevertheless there 
were serious conflicts between the Mormons and 
the Gentiles, which culminated in the massacre of 
twenty Mormons at Hawn's Mill. In the autumn 
the state authorities demanded the expulsion of 
the Mormons, except the leaders, who were to be 
held for trial. Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum 
were imprisoned at Liberty, but on the way to trial 
effected their escape, probably by bribery. The 
two brothers rode to Quincy, III. To this state 
most of the Mormons, to the number of about 
15,000, had already fled. The prophet bought 
large tracts of land in Hancock County and beyonc' 
the Mississippi in Iowa. On the eastern bank of 
the river the Mormons began to build a city to 
which by revelation the name Nauvoo was given. 
The Mormon propaganda was meanwhile vigor- 
ously at work in the United States and abroad, and 
(1840-43) converts flocked to Nauvoo to the esti- 
mated number of 3,758. Smith procured from the 
state legislature a charter for the city which made it 
almost independent of state control. The prophet 
now organized a military body under the name of 
the Nauvoo legion, himself assuming the command 
with the title of general. In Apr., 1841, the foun- 
dation of a new temple was laid; it was dedicated 
May 1, 1846. Smith began now to take interest in 
state and national politics. He appealed to Presi- 
dent Van Buren for help to recover losses of prop- 
erty in Missouri; but as neither the president nor 
Congress would take action, and as Clay and Cal- 
hoim, presidential aspirants, gave non-conunittal 
answers to his inquiries concerning their attitude 
toward the Mormons' claims, he announced him- 
self in the organ of the church a candidate for the 
presidency of the United States. As Smith's power 
increased, his profligacy also grew. In order to 
quiet the indignation of his wife the prophet in 
1843 imparted to a select few a revelation which 
permitted himself and (with his sanction) others 
to have more than one wife. This revelation was 
openly promulgated first in 1852 by Brigham Young. 
In Nauvoo the polygamous practises occasioned 
serious dissensions. A Dr. Foster and two others 
started an independent newspaper, called the Eav 
posiior. Its first — and only — number condemned va- 
rious church practises and doctrines including that 
of the plurality of wives. At Smith's behest the 




press and property of the Expositor were destroyed 
and Foster was expelled from the city. Aroused 
to indignation by the revelation of the sUite of 
things in Nauvoo and perhaps no less by various 
mysterious depredations in the surrounding coun- 
try, the ixjople of bordering counties raised forces 
for a proposed w^ar against the Mormons. The 
prophet with st'veral others planned to flee, but 
upon Governor Ford's promise of protection he sur- 
rendered himself at Carthage June 24, 1844, but on 
the night of June 27 a band of disguised ruffians 
broke into the jail and shot to death the prophet 
and his brother Hyrum. 

The tragic end of the prophet turned to the ad- 
vantage of the Mormons. It placed on him the halo 
of martyrdom, while the leadership 
12. Bxighamfell into the hands of a man who was 
Young; his sui>erior as an organizer and ruler, 
Removal though inferior to him as ])ro[)hct and 
to Utah, religious enthusiast. There were sev- 
eral rival candidates for the oflice of 
first prophet and president. Rigdon was easily 
disposed of and even excomnmnicated. Other 
candidates, besides Young, were Strang and tiic 
prophet's son, Joseph Smith, 3d. Strang loudly 
proclaimed that he had received a revelation tliat he 
should be Smith's successor. Upon Young's elec- 
tion he withdrew with his followers and settled in 
Wisconsin, where in 1856 he was shot as the result 
of a quarrel with two members of his sect. The 
" Young Josephites," largely holding aloof from 
Brigham Y^'oung, founded in 1852 — in a more defi- 
nite way in IHGO — the Reorganize<l Church of Jesus 
Christ of Iiatter-day Saints with Joseph Smith, 3d, 
at the liead (see below, III.). Brigham Y'oung (b. 
in Whitingham, Vt., June 1, 1801; d. in Salt Lake 
City Aug. 29, 1877) was the logical successor of 
Smith. Although originally only an ordinary car- 
jxinter he proved himself to Ixj a man of very ex- 
traordinary talentji. His le^vdership was cordially 
accepted by the great majority of the Saints. In 

1845 the legislature of Illinois found it necessary to 
withdraw the charter of the city of Nauvoo. This 
condition, coupletl with the unabated hostility of 
the surrounding non-Mormons, led the Saints to 
the determinjition to emigrate far beyond the bor- 
ders of civilization. The Valley of the Great Salt 
Lake was finally fixed upon. The exodus began in 

1846 and before the close of 1848 the whole body 
of Young's ailherents had crossed the plains except 
a few left at the Missouri as forwarding agents for 
Mormon emigrants. In Sept., 1846, the Mormons 
that had not already departed were forcibly 
cxpeHe<i from Illinois by a general uprising. The 
migration to Utah was a stupendous undertaking, 
r.fTording Young a supreme opportunity for the de- 
velopment and display of his talents as organizer 
and leader, so that he entered upon his adminis- 
tration in Utah with the prestige of a signal tri- 
umph. He reached his destination July 24, 1847. 
Immediately the founding of Salt Lake City was 
iK'gun. A fund was established for the aiMMtance 
ot Mormon emigrants, who, coming from Great 
Hritain, Sweden, and Norway, and in leas 
bers from Germany, Switierlaod, and SVar 
the years 1848-51 reached tbB monbiH 

and in the years 1852-55 from Great Britain alone 

The design of Brigham Young was to build up a 
state which, both economically and politically, 
should be as nearly independent as 
I3« Defiance possible. The economic success of the 
of the Monnon community was due in part 
United to his skilful, though despotic, man- 
States, agemeut, but also in no small measure 
to the inflow of money brought by 
the California gold-soekers and, at a later period, 
to the construction of the Union Pacific Railroad. 
In their political designs the Mormons were less 
fortunate. When, in 1848, the region witliin which 
th«ir settlements lay became United States terri- 
tory. Young quickly decided that he wanted state- 
hood for his colony, not territorial rule by the fed- 
eral authorities. A " provisional " government was 
set up for the " State of Deseret,*' whose boundaries 
were set so wide as to include most of the territory 
acquired by the United States from Mexico. In 
1849 a constitution was prepared and a delegate 
sent to Wasliington with a petition for admission 
into the Union. Congress, however, refused to 
recognize the new state and ignored the name 
Deseret. In 1850 it organized a territorial govern- 
ment for the smaller rt»gion occupied by the Mor- 
mon settlements and gave the new territory the 
name Utah. The president appointed Brigham 
Young governor; also district judges were ap- 
pointed by the federal government. But Y'oung's 
tactics were so aggressive that the federal officers 
were soon compt4led to withdraw. As Young's 
term of office drew to a close President Pierce pur- 
posed to appoint a non-Mormon in his stead. He 
offered the place to Lieutcnant-Ck)lonel Steptoe, 
then in Utah with a small military force. But 
Y'oung's attitude was so threatening that Steptoe 
dared not accept the office. In a message to 
Congress in 1857 Buchanan declared that '* there 
no longer remained any government in Utah but 
the despotism of Brighimi Young." *' To restore 
the supremacy of the constitution and laws within 
its limits " the president appoint(Ml a new governor 
(Alfred CHimming) and other federal officers, and 
sent them to their posts accompanied by a military 
force of 2,500 men ** for their protection and to aid 
as a posse comitatus in case of need in the execu- 
tion of the laws." That a collision was imminent 
between Monnondom and the fe<leral government 
was clear to all who understood the state of affairs 
in Utah and the principles and poficy of Young. 
Polygamy flourished as an avowed doctrine of the 
church. Young had acquired an almost incredible 
power as dictator. He was a mighty force for order 
according to his system, but the means which he 
employed were often atrocious. In order to accom- 
plish a much-needed '* reformation " he instituted 
a veritable reign of terror, and there were not a few 
" ohureh-inspiSred murders." It was natural, there- 
fore, that when Young heard of the coming of the 
fedenl ofltosn and troops, his atUtude should be 
boldly defiant. He publidy announced the news 
I ^ •hb vmahm ^ invaifam." and declared he wookl. 

orfhedeviL" HeoaOed. 
liaiMMd fhe ffedflrffaa 




troops in various wasrs, and by cutting off their 
base of supplies effectually crippled them, com- 
pelling them to retire into winter quarters. The 
year 1857 witnessed the most frightful act of vio- 
lence in the history of the Mormons — the massacre 
of 150 non-Mormon emigrants at Mountain Mead- 
ows by a band of Mormons and Indians under the 
lead of Bishop John D. Lee. Not until twenty 
years later could Lee be seized for his crime, tried, 
condemned, and executed. Early in 1858 Young 
procured from President Buchanan a free pardon 
for all the Mormon leaders, and peace was declared. 
The last of the federal troops were withdrawn in 
1860. It is certain, however, that Young never in- 
tended real submission to the federal government. 
The more or less open Mormon defiance continued 
until in 1890 the church reluctantly *' traded polyg- 
amy for Statehood." 

The fight of the United States government against 
polygamy in the territories began with the Morrill 
biU of 1860 (enacted 1862). The 
14. Sup- measure was ineffective because the 
pression of conviction of a polygamist could not 
Polygamy; be had from Mormon juries. The 
Stmtehood. CuUom biU of 1869 (which failed of 
passage in the Senate) was opposed 
by Delegate Hooper of Utah on the ground that the 
Mormons' doctrine of marriage, being an essential 
part of their religious faith, was entitled to full 
protection imder the constitution. Presidents, one 
after another, recommended to Congress a more 
vigorous procedure against the Mormons. In a 
message in 1880 President Hayes declared: " Po- 
lygamy can only be suppressed by taking away the 
politicad power of the sect which encourages and 
sustains it." Reconunendations of Garfield and 
of Arthur in 1881 led to the enactment in 1882 of 
the " Edmunds Law," improved 1887 (" Edmunds- 
Tucker Law "), which provided that no polygamist 
might vote in any territory or hold office under the 
United States. The attitude of the Mormon church 
toward the law is manifest from An Epistle of the 
Firtl Presidency to the officers and members 0/ the 
church, Oct. 6, 1885: 

'*Tbe war is openly and [undiaguisedly made upon our re- 
fision. To induce men to repudiate that, to violate its pre- 
cepts, and break its solemn covenants, every inducement is 
given. . . . We did not reveal celestial marriage. We can 
not withdraw or renoimce it. Qod revealed it, and he has 
promised to mainfjtin it and to bless those who obey it." 

Prosecutions under the Eklmunds Law began in 
18S4; convictions for polygamy or imlawful co- 
habitation (mostly the latter) numbered 3 in 1884, 
39 in 1885, 112 in 1886, 214 in 1887, and 100 in 
1888. Among the provisions of the act of 1887 
WB8 one that dissolved the corporation of the Mor- 
mon church. In 1890 the United States supreme 
eourt affirmed a decision of a lower court confis- 
cating the property of the Mormon church, and de- 
claring that church to be an organized rebellion. 
In the same 3rear Congress passed €ln act disposing 
of the church lands for the benefit of the school 
fund. After the admission of Utah as a state Con- 
gress restored the property. Perceiving the futility 
of further resistance President Woodruff, Sept. 25, 
1890, issued a proclamation (not a revelation in 
whidi he declared that his '' advice to the Latter- 


Day Saints is to refrain from contracting any mar- 
riage forbidden by the law of the land.'' It was no 
recession from the principle of polygamy, only a 
necessary concession to the force of public law. 
By the concession in the matter of polygamy the 
chief obstacle to statehood for Utah was removed. 
Its admission finally took place in Jan., 1906. The 
political difficulties of the Mormons have led the 
church so far to modify its political creed as to declare 
that the Saints ** form not a rival power as against 
the Union, but an apostolic ministry to it, and their 
political gospel is state rights and self-government." 
Brigham Yoimg died leaving an estate of S2,- 
000,000 to be divided among his seventeen \\ives 
— he had had twenty-five wives all 

15, Late told — and fifty-six children.* After his 

History; death the twelve apostles with John 

Present Taylor at their head exercised the 

Status, chief authority imtil Taylor's election 

to the presidency in 1880 with Geoige 
Q. Caimon and Joseph F. Smith as coimselors. In 
like manner after Taylor's death in 1887 the twelve 
again ruled until the election of Wilford Woodruff 
to the presidency in 1889. Upon his death in 1898 
Lorenzo Snow was made president. All of these 
were acknowledged polygamists. As successor to 
Snow (d. 1901) Joseph F. Smith, son of the martyr 
patriarch, Hyrum Smith, was chosen president. 
Though these were all able men, no one of his suc- 
cessors has been comparable to Brigham Young. 
Although rough and uncultured, he possessed enor- 
mous physical and mental energy and all the quali- 
fications of a great popular leader. To him even 
more than to Joseph Smith Mormondom owes its 
coherence and persistence. He received revela- 
tions when he needed them — and many of the most 
offensive doctrines of Mormonism were promul- 
gated by him — ^yet he was far more an organizer 
than a prophet. The " Utah " Mormons numbered 
in 1909 about 350,000 members (baptized believers) 
in the United States. Considerably more than one- 
half of these are found in Utah, though there is 
probably not a state or territory in the Union with- 
out some of them, while in all the states and terri- 
tories bordering on Utah, especially in Idaho and 
Arizona, they have gained a firm foothold and 
make themselves felt politically. There are at 
least 15,000 Mormons in Europe (chiefly in Great 
Britain, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Switzerland, 
Holland, and Belgium). A considerable number is 
in Canada and a few are to be found in each of a 
score of other countries in various quarters of the 
globe. Their propaganda, which suffered a check 
by the promulgation of the doctrine of polygamy 
in 1852, has been vigorous and fairly successful 
since Woodruff's manifesto advising the Saints to 
contract no marriage forbidden by law. 

The first principle of Mormonism is belief in a 
present and progressive revelation. According to 

their official statement, their religion 

16. Doc- " consists of doctrines, command- 
trinal ments, ordinances, and rites revealed 

System, from God to the present age." The 
conception of revelation is apocalyp- 
tic. From time to time noteworthy changes have 
taken place in their doctrine, and others can come 




at any time. It is true only in the vaguest sense 
that the church's creed, belief, aims, and purposes 
liave remained the same. The Mormons, acknowl- 
c<lge as the word of God the Bible " in so far as it 
is correctly translated," the Book of Mormon, and 
the revelations contained in Doctrine and CovenarUa 
and in later publications. So far as the Bible is 
concerned, Joseph Smith and his successors have 
taken such liberties with its meaning, and even 
with its text, that it can not be said to liiive any 
authority for a Mormon. The Book of Monnon, so 
important historically, is not comparable, in doc- 
trinal significance, with the Book of Doctrine arui 
Covenantu and the Penrl of Great Price. In the year 
1842 Joseph Smith published a short outline of 
Mormon belief. In it the doctrine of the Trinity 
was acknowledged, while punishment of the race 
for Adam's fall was denied. Through Christ's pro- 
pitiatory sacrifice salvation is possible for all men, 
on condition of obedience to the ordinances of the 
Gospel. These are: faith, repentance, ba))ti8m for 
the remission of sins; the laying on of hands for 
the receiving of the Holy Ghost. The true church 
must have the same institutions and the same spir- 
itual gifts as the Apostolic Church. There Is taught 
further the gathering together of Israeli and the 
restoration of the ten tribes. Zion will Ixj built 
somewhere on the American continent and (-hrist 
will rule in person upon the earth, which vdW be 
renewed to paradisiacal glory. All men should Ix? in 
possession of religious liberty. Obedience and rev- 
erence should be accorded to kings and all in au- 
thority. A pure, honest, chaste, and beneficent life 
is a holy duty. This, however, affords only a faint 
notion of what Mormonism was then, to say noth- 
ing of its later manifestations. Its doctrine of God, 
for example, is widely different from tliat of the 
Christian Church. The Mormon conception of deity 
rather resembles that of Buddhism. From it a sys- 
tem of anthropomori)hisms has been develope<J, 
which far exceeds that of any Christian sect in any 
age. The Mormons teach that nothing is create<l, 
everything is lx>gotten. The supreme God (him- 
self brought forth in some way by eternal, self- 
moving, and intelligent matter) begot other gods. 
All liave bodies, parts, and passions, for " man is 
made in the image of God." A chief occupation of 
these gods is to produce souls for the bodies be- 
gotten in this and other worlds. The sex idea runs 
through the whole Mormon conception of the uni- 
verse. Each world has its own god; ours is none 
other than Adam — who gradually attained his 
present glory. " He is the only God with whom 
we have to do." All gods are in a progressive de- 
velopment, and all Saints will advance to the dig- 
nity of gods. Justification by faith as taught by 
Evangelical churches is a '' destructive doctrine." 
Submission and obedience to the commandments 
of the church is tlie essential thing in faith. Bap- 
tism, through which sins are washed away, is un- 
conditionally necessary to salvation. Infant bap- 
tism is a '^ solemn modcery/' for little children have 
no sins to repent of and are not under the ourse of 
Adam. An essential feature of the Iforaum qfitem 
is the doctrine and practise of bapCimi for the dead. 
As the true Church was extinet upon 

shortly after the days of the apostles until Joseph 
Smith, no baptism in all that time was valid. Saints, 
however, may be baptized for the dead and thus 
insure the salvation of the latter. The most no- 
torious of the Mormon doctrines is that of celestial 
marriage, or marriage unto eternity. All marriages 
entered into without divine sanction, such as is 
given only to the Saints, are dlssolvetl by deatL 
Those, on the other hand, who we<l in accordance 
with the true Gospel are married for eternity. If 
a wife thus sealed precedes her husband in death, 
he may in like manner marry another, and, if the 
second should die, a third, and so on. In the resur- 
rection all are to be his. Moreover, inasmuch as in 
eternity a man may have many wives, so may he 
even in this worki, and at one time, if God and his 
Church sanction it. As many women as God thus 
gives a man are his and his alone, and cohabitation 
with them is right and holy. In its belialf the Mor- 
mons claim that this doctrine strongly tends to ex- 
clude lulultery and prostitution. 

In close relation to the doctrinal s^'stem stand 

the church commandments, ordinances, and public 

worship. Only l)eliever8 are baptized, and that by 

immersion, and it is followed immedi- 

17. Ordi- ately by the laying-on of hands. The 

nances in celebration of the Lonl's Supper takes 
Theory and place every Sunday. By special reve- 

Practise. lation the use of fermented wine was 
forbidden; now even the unfermented 
juice of the grape gives place to water. The Saints 
liave certain secret rit^is or mysteries, the most im- 
I>ortant of which are those connectetl with the mar- 
riage ceremony, known as going through the Eii- 
do\\Tnent House. In Salt Lake City all secret rites 
are now performed in the temple. No non-Mormon 
may enter the temple, whereas access to the great 
tabernacle is free to all. Public worship consists of 
song, prayer, sermon, celebration of the Lord's 
Supper, and sometimes the dispensing of blessings 
by a patriarch. In the t^ibemacle at Salt I^^vke the 
music is excellent ami impressive. Generally two 
persons preach in a single service. Tlie sermons are 
for the most part- mere harangues, usually without 
a text, and a mixture of the religious and the secu- 
lar. Everything, however, is manifestly adapted 
to the end in view. Ilegardcd as an organism Mor- 
monism strives to realize the ideal of a pure the- 
ocracy based on prophetlsm and mediated by a 
hierarchy. In its beginnings a free prophetism 
ruled ; but as it was perceived what confusion must 
arise if every man were his 0^*11 prophet, there early 
developed a great hierarcliical system. While every 
member of the church may enjoy the blessings of 
diWne communion and revelations for his own com- 
fort and guidance, revelations affecting the whole 
chureh are given only through the president, al- 
though his counselors may share illumination with 
him. The priesthood is of two onlers: the Aaronio 
(chai^ged vnXh secular affairs) and the Melchiaedeo 
(chai|^ with spiritual affairs). The latter is the 
higher and may overrule the former. Every worthy 
adult male member has a place in one or the other 
of these orders. There is no salaried preaching 
daaL It is e»peeted of each member that he will 
i& WB^ Irak to.iHuioh he may be assigned, at 




honoe or abroad. About 2,000 missionaries are con- 
stantly at woric, the personnel being largely changed 
eveiy two or four years. Each mission is under the 
preGodency of an elder and has the necessary minor 
officers. The missionaries travel and labor by twos 
or in larger groups. In the making of proselytes 
the more offensive (esoteric) doctrines of Mormon- 
ism are passed over without mention; stress is laid 
on the doctrine of a progressive, present-day rev- 
elation and the (materialistic) glories promised to 
the Saints. 

Tlie ranks of the Melchisedec priesthood are the 

following: (1) The council of the first presidency, 

consisting of three men, in office and 

iS. Priest- dignity equal to Peter, James, and John. 

hood and One of these is church president, 
Govern- chosen in a general assembly, and the 
ment others are his counselors. These may 
be against him in counsels but never 
in final decisions. For the whole church the presi- 
dent is prophet^ seer, and revelator, and his author- 
ity is absolute. (2) The twelve apostles, or ex- 
traordinary witnesses of the name of Christ in the 
whole world. In the interval between the death of 
a president and the election of his successor the 
twelve exercise the highest authority in the church. 
(3) Presidents of the quorums of seventy; (4) pa- 
triarchs; (5) high priests. The Aaronic priesthood 
includes: (1) bishops, who have charge of the 
gathering c^ the tithes and the care of the poor; 
(2) priests; (3) teachers; (4) deacons. Territo- 
rially the church is divided into " stakes of Zion '' 
and the stakes again into wards. The stakes of 
Zion are so called in distinction from Zion proper, 
which is in Jackson County, Mo., whither also the 
Saints are to assemble themselves at last to receive 
the returning Christ. In North America there are 
some fifty d these stakes, twenty-one of them in 
Utah. Each stake has an organization which copies 
that of the entire church. For each stake also 
there is a presiding bishop and for each ward a 
bishop. The bishops are assisted by under officers. 
By means of this elaborate yet well-balanced sys- 
tem the church maintains a most effective over- 
act of its affairs. The social and economic as- 
pects of Mormonism have ever been interesting and 
are in part worthy of praise. The rigorous system 
has been raooessful in restraining many vices and 
in producing a high general state of material well- 
l, while the lawless subjectivism of its prophet- 
opened the gate to polygamy and other 
▼ickNis doctrines and practises, has wrought un- 
told harm to its pe<^le. Separating itself from the 
CSmtian (3nireh and (as far as practicable) from 
the htger civO and social community, Mormonism 
ii neeenarilj deficient in many of the best elements 
of modeni cnilture. It has, however, combined into 
mm the lel^gioiis and the social element more success- 
fiill|y than any other movement of modern times. 

J. R. Van Pelt. 

HL The Raofgiuilzed Church of Jesus Christ of 
ttUtt'Jiaj Saints: This body claims to be the 
ei ihftt name that was organized by Joseph 
hk fWyette, N. Y., ^r. 6, 1830, and subse- 
~ * st Kirtland, O. This contention is 

W tba Utah body of Latter-day Saints. 

The disruption occurred in 1844, the main body 
having meantime removed from Kirtland to Mis- 
souri, thence to Nauvoo, 111. (see I.-IL, above); the 
smaller body was reorganized near Beloit, Wis. 
At the first conference of the latter, in 1852, the 
leadership of Brigham Young was disowned. The 
Reorganized Church has never favored polygamy, 
but has borne testimony against it. It accepts 
three books as of divine origin : the Bible, the Book 
of Mormon, and the Book of Covenants — the last 
as a guide in church government, the Book of Mor- 
mon as a history of the inhabitants of America for 
2,400 years, closing 400 a.d., and the Bible as the 
word of God, so far as it is translated correctly. 
The faith of the church is that of the epitome, made 
by Joseph Smith in 1842 (ut sup.) and enlarged 
somewhat since. Articles were inserted after po- 
lygamy became a tenet of the faith of the Utah 
branch, declaring for monogamy and against the 
doctrine of plural wives. 

The system of polity is similar to that of the Utah 
branch, consisting of the presidency, embracing 
when full, three men, the apostolate, the quo- 
rums of seventy, and priests or pastors, teachers, 
deacons, and bishops — the last-named conducting 
the business affairs of the church. 

The headquarters of the church, which were in 
Piano, III., for nearly twenty years, were removed 
in 1881 to Lamoni, la., where they now are. There 
are in Lamoni a publishing house, a college, and 
two homes for the aged. The church carries on 
missionary work in the United States, Canada, 
Australia, Great Britain, Germany, Scandinavia, 
Mexico, and the Sandwich and Society Islands. It 
reports in the United States alone 49,500 members, 
660 churches, and 1,200 ministers. It is slowly in- 
creasing in membership. 

The president of the church is Joseph Smith, son 
of the first president. He has held this office since 
1860. He lives in Independence, Mo.; his associ- 
ates are Frederick M. Smith, Independence, Mo., 
and Richard Evans, Toronto, Canada. The presi- 
dent of the quonun of the twelve apostles is Will- 
iam H. Kelley, Lamoni, la. ; and Heman C. Smith, 
of the same place, is second in order of appoint- 
ment, and is also historian of the church. 

H. K. Carroll. 

IV. Anti-Mormon Movements: Joseph Smith 
once said with emphasis and apparent pride: ^' Mor- 
monism is at war with every craft and creed of 
Christendom." That statement has had abundant 
verification in every period of Mormon history. 
But in Nauvoo and afterward in Utah there were 
many but futile attempts to reform 
I. To 1869. Mormonism from within. The advent 
of the United States army into Utah, 
the opening of mines, and the inflow of ** Gentiles " 
afforded protection and gave promise of help from 
without. Three powerful forces of Christian civil- 
ization were invoked: the press, the pulpit, and the 
school. The first paper published was The Valley 
Tarty issued in 1858 from the camp. The Salt Lake 
Vedette followed, then The Utah Magazine, after- 
ward The Tribune, and others in subsequent years. 
Some young men of literary tastes organized a 
" literary and musical societ^y," which maintained 




a struggling existence. In 1865 they invited the 
Rev. Nonnan McLeod, an army chaplain and Con- 
gregational minister, to the city. He instituted 
services in a hall in Main Street. A Simday-school 
was organized in the city and another at the camp, 
and Dr. John King Robinson, surgeon in the army, 
became superintendent. The literaiy society, with 
help from California, erected Independence Hall, 
a commodious adobe building for religious and 
literary purposes. The next year McLeod went 
east to solicit funds. In his absence Dr. Robinson 
was treacherously murdered. McLeod was ad- 
vised by friends not to return to Utah, as his life 
was in danger. But Major Charles H. Hempsted, 
United States district attorney, maintained the 
Sunday-school. Early in 1867 Warren Hussey and 
two Episcopalian ladies, Mrs. Dr. Hamilton and 
Mrs. Oliver Durant, requested Bishop Tuttle of 
Montana to send a cleigyman. He sent Rev. Messrs. 
Thomas W. Hawkins and George W. Foote. In 
May they instituted the first permanent Christian 
service in Salt Lake City. Major Hempsted gave 
into their hands the Simday-school with an enrol- 
ment of fifty. Responding to a crying need for 
school facilities, they, in July, opened St. Mark's 
grammar-school. An Episcopal church of fifteen 
communicants was constituted that summer. A 
much-needed hospital was provided, the first in 
Utah. In years following tMs denomination estab- 
lished churches and schools in five other towns, 
and a second church, St. Paul's, in Salt Lake City. 
On the removal of Bishop Tuttle to Salt Lake City 
in 1869, St. Marie's became the cathedral. Subse- 
quently Rowland Hall, a boarding and day-school 
for girls, was opened. The Episcopalians now have 
property in Utah worth about $400,000. 

In 1869 two Presbyterian ministers, Sheldon 
Jackson (q.v.) and Melanchthon Hughes, held the 
first religious service in Corinne and instituted reg- 
ular work. A church of nine members was organ- 
ized July 14, 1870. In 1864 the Rev. 

2. From Henry Kendall, secretary of the Pres- 
1869 to the byterian Board of Home Missions, 

Present while en route to California, preached 
in the Mormon Tabernacle in Salt 
Lake City. He found in the city Presbyterians 
eager for church privileges, but not until 1871 was 
their request granted. Rev. Josiah Welch arrived 
in July of that year, and instituted regular services 
in a room above a livery stable. Out of this be- 
ginning grew the First Presbyterian Church of Salt 
Lake City. In 1875 Rev. D. J. McMillan arrived 
and instituted an aggressive policy. Within six 
years he established 40 missions and schools, from 
St. George in the extreme south of Utah, to Malad, 
Idaho, the northern part of the Mormon realm. At 
present the Presbyterians have 27 ministers, 27 
churches, 1,819 communicants, 1 college, 4 acad- 
emies (boarding and day-schools), 13 day-schools, 
1,402 scholars, and property amounting to $650,000. 
Since the establishment of a public-school system 
in* Utah the denominations have discontinued many 
of their parochial and mission schools. In 1870 the 
Rev. G. M. Peirce, a Methodist minister, arrived 
in Salt Lake City, at once began work, and soon 
established a church. In 1876 he launched Tfie 

Rocky Mountain ChriMian Advocate, the first Prot- 
estant religious paper in Utah. This denomination 
extended its church and school work into many 
parts of Utah. It now has 23 ministers in charge 
of 27 churches, with 1,550 members, 35 Simday- 
schools with 2,530 scholars, and church and manse 
property worth $222,100. 

In 1873 Rev. Father Scanlan of the Roman Cath- 
olic Church was sent to Salt Lake City. Three 
years previously Rev. Father Kelley from Nevada 
visited the city and purchased a plot of land for 
church purposes, but held no service. Father 
Scanlan established St. Mary's Church, and in 
course of time twelve other parishes and forty mis- 
sions, in 1875 St. Mary's Academy, in 1881 Holy 
Cross Hospital, in 1886 All Hallows Collie, and 
later Keams St. Aim's Orphanage. Schools were 
opened in five other towns. Father Scanlan is now 
bishop, and St. Mary's is his cathedral, with a new 
building costing $350,000. In 1874 the Congr^a- 
tionalists returned and organized a church in In- 
dependence Hall, with Rev. Walter M. Barrows as 
pastor. In 1878 Hammond Hall and later two 
other academies and five mission schools in other 
parts were opened. At present the Congregation- 
alists have 10 churches with 1,327 members and 10 
Sunday-schools with an enrolment of 1,260. 

In 1881 Rev. Dwight Spencer, superintendent of 
Baptist missions, reached Salt Lake City, and or- 
ganized a church which has grown and multiplied. 
That denomination has now 10 ministers and 10 
churches, with 1,000 members. In 1882 the Lu- 
theran Church entered Utah. They have pursued 
a conservative policy and accomplished substantial 
results. The Josephites (non-polygamous Mor- 
mons) established several churches and have quietly 
served those Mormons who repudiate polygamy and 
the divine right of Brigham Young and his follow- 
ers. The Jews from the first have done their part 
well. They have helped all the Christian churches 
and maintained several synagogues. The Y. M. C. A. 
has acquired property worth $240,000; it has 1,365 
members, 1,013 of whom are members of Protestant 
chiuches; 585 are in educational classes, and 31 1 in 
Bible classes. D. J. McMillan. 

Biblioobapht: From the Mormon standpoint: Book of 
Mormon, Ist ed., Palmjrra, N. Y., 1839, current publica- 
tion in revised form at Salt Lake City; Joseph Smith, 
Book of Doctrine and Covenants, Kirtland, Ohio. 1835; 
The Pearl of Great Price, Salt Lake City, 1891 and cur- 
rent (selections from Joseph Smith's writings); various 
works of B. H. Roberts, currently published at Salt Lake 
City, e. g.. The Oospel, OiUlinee of Eccleaiaetical History, 
New Witneee for Ood, Defence of the Faith and of the Sainte; 
P. P. Pratt, A Voice of Warning to All Nations, Kirtland, 
1838; Thompson, Evidences in Proof of the " Book of Mor- 
mon," Batavia, 1841; Lucy Smith, Biographical Sketches 
of Joseph Smith and his Progenitors, Liverpool. 1853, Piano, 
ni.. 1880 (by the prophet's mother); E. W. Tullidge, Life 
of Joseph the Prophet, Piano. 1880; idem. HisL of Salt 
Lake City, Salt Lake CHty, 1886; J. E. Tahnage. Articles 
of Faith, ib. 1899; Joseph Smith 3d. and H. C. Smith. 
HisL of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 
Lamoni, la., 1901; B. H. Roberts, Mormon Doctrine of 
Deity, Salt Lake City, 1903; L. A. Wilson, OuUines of 
Mormon Philosophy, ib. 1905; J. H. Evans, One Hundred 
Years of Mormonism, 1806-1906, ib. 1906. 

From the historical, critical, or anti-Mormon point of 
view: W. A. Linn. Story of the Mormons, from the DcUe 
of their Origin to . . . 1901, New York, 1902 (de- 
tailed); H. H. Bancroft, HisL of the Pacific States, vol 


nu Ulak. San Fruicuico. 1SS9: E. D. Hon, Afor- 
*u»M Unreiltd. PtuDnvillc. Ohiii. 1K(4; U. P. Kiddisr. 
U^rmtnun aiW .IfanKini.' kuIoHail I'mu <tr £A> Ai'u 
shI Pragn— at Oti . . . LaBcr-Day Sainlt, New York, 
I»13: B. G. FcTTU. (/loA and At Monmnu. ib. 18M^ J 
W. GuKDiwui. rAf .UorrmxM, Philulalpliui. IS56; J. Hyds, 
Jr„ Mormoiatm; iU Leadtrt and Desiffna, New York, 
ISST (br Bn «-Hannan); P. Tucker. Oriaii, Rit, and 
pToarwMt b/ Monumum, ib. 1867; J. H. Budle, Life in 
UbA: or. Ih< MtalenH and Criiw* itT Af umuniin, Phils- 
dctphik. IBTOi itlHii. Palyaamy: at. Oxt Mylaia . . . of 
Ut>r<HniiM. FulLOD. Ky, 1001; M. Biuch, OncAidUi dn- 
Manunun nsbrt DarMtUuaQ lAru Gfauteiu. Lcipaie, 1S70; 
F. H. Ludlow. Htart of Ou CoHlimnl; inlh an Eatmina- 
IvmofOu Morvum fVincipfc. Nbw York, 1870; T, B, H. 
eumhoutn rhi R<k;Iv Uounlum SainU. lb. 1873; R. von 
BehlociDlweit. Cw UornuuH . . . ipon iAttt EnOUIiuua 
hi aa/dit Grtrnioarl, Caluene, 1878; J. H. Kcimnly, £<]W;r 
Davi 14^ JVorwunim. New York. 1888; T. Gngg. The 
Fmrlttl (/ Fainvni. Mormmatn: tooelturr u-ilh a compUU 
HiM-nfaie Uonnon Era. ib. 1890; W. H. Tbomas. Mor- 
■un SoinU. LotulaD. IBM); M. T. Uunb, rib^ A/Drmoni 
and (Iwv- SiAk. PhUsdetpb^ 1901; I. W. Riley. rA* 
FwwfD- ef Afurmoni™. New York. IB02: N. L. Nelson. 
SeitHlifii Atptdt of Mormumttn. tb. 1904; Mra, J. i'. Wil- 
ling Oh AlHirican Soil; or. AfoTTnaniim Ue Mahammaiati- 
itm rfOu n-eM, lAuisville. 1006; E. V. Fotilin. SaU Lake 
CitM, Pa^ and Promt. A NaTTolivi: afita HMory and Ro- 
WHOut, it! People and CuUurt^ itt Indiatrv and Commrree. 
Salt L«ka aiy, 1900. A considemble body of miWftiine 
BtHmlDTC ifl Lsdicaled in KIcbKTdKjn. Encyciopaediu. pp. 

HORITIRG LBCTDRES: The luime usually 
I of Bermons published under the 
rercisfs nl CrippUgaU, St.-Giie»-in- 
1 Soulhirark, being divert Sermona 
f f*!/ several MinitUrt of 
T London, S vols., LoimIou; re- 
pubUahed. ed. J. Nichols. 6 vols., London, 1844. 
The occasion La thus given by D. Neal {Hist, of the 
Pvriiaiu. i. 424, New York, 18fl3): "The opening 
of the war [between parliament ttnd King Charles 
L] gftve rise lo an exerciBB of prayer, and exhorta- 
tion to repentance, for an hour every morning in 
the week. Most of the citizens of London having 
aome Tjear relation or friend in the army of the 
Earl of Eesex, so many bills were sent up to the 
pulpit every Lord's Day for their preservation, 
thftt the minister had neither time to read them, 
nor to recommend their cases to God in prayer: it 
was therefore agreed, by scmie London divines, to 
sepamte an hour for this purpose every morning, 
on^half to be sjicnt in prayer, and the olher in a 
suitable exhortation to the people." These serv- 
ices were held in various churches consecutively. 
and, after the end of tlie war, were continued, unlil 
the Revolution, in a modified form, the sermons 
taking up points of practical divinity. The collec- 
tion of sermons lb regarded as " one of the i^ 
cotDpends of tbiMDiogy io the English language." 

HOROKE, mii-rS'n?, GIOVAHHI DE: Itslifui 
wr-iinal; b. at Milan Jan. 23, liiOS; d. in Romp 
Di'C. I. I.tSO. He studied law at Padua, but entered 
(he ecclesiastical life, and as early as 1521). tor 
ivrricee rendered by his father, he was appointed 
by Clement VII- to the bishopric of Modena. Paul 
r/l„ on asceoding the papal throne in 1535, des- 
patched Ihe young bishop as nuncio to the duke of 
Mrlan, (hen to Germany, whence Vergerio bad just 
i«um«d. Hla chief task and commission was to 

Saogurajid eh*ew 

pnmote both with King Ferdinand and 
Honanr^ jiad eh*ewbere, the cause of the proposed 

council at Mantua; to dissipate the opposition that 
had been roused against the choice of that place; 
and to inform tlie Curia concerning everything thiit 
bore upon ecclesiastical questions (the records of 
this nunciature were published with annotations 
by W. Friedensburg, Gotha, 18Q2). Morone was 
once more sent acroes the Alps (1540). this time to 
the conference in session at Spires. Though hewos 
likewise present at Regenaburg in 1541, yet the 
controlling part there fell to Cardinal Gosparo Con- 
tarini (q.v.). Morone, who in the mean time had 
become a cardinal, returned to Modena in 1542, 
where ho now found serious heresies at work, es- 
pecially among the members c)f the local Academy 
of the Grillenzoni. It hod become habitual to read 
Somtnario delta Sacra ScrUlura (" Summary of 
Sacred Scripture "), while Protestant %'ieW8 ob- 
tained on various doctrines. After somewhat pro- 
tracted proceedings, those under examination signed 
certain articles whereby they signified their ortho- 
doxy. Morone himself belonged to the circle of 
people who valued highly the little book, " Of the 
Benefit of Christ's Death "(sea iTALr, the REf- 
OKMATION IN, { 7), a point subsequently brought 
forward in the trial that was instituted against him 
on the charge of heresy. For neither the important 
services which Morone bad rendered the Curia dur- 
ing his nunciatures nor those which he had rendered 
as one of the legates at the Council of Trent could 
shield him from the mistrust of the fanaiicol Paul 
IV. (q.v.). The pope included Morone, along with 
two other bishops and Cardinal Pole (q.v.). under 
a writ of indictment (June, 1557); and, once com- 
mitted to prison in the Castle of San Angcio, 
Morone wns obliged to linger there till after the 
pope's death (1560). Pius IV., in whose election 
the cardinal, liberated after the pope's death, had 
token part, declared hjm innocent and quashed the 
trial, and when the Council of Trent reopened, the 
pope designated Cardinal Morone as one of its 
presidents. This experienced diplomat was em- 
ployed also by Gregory XIII., who despatched him 
to Genoa, and in I5T6 to Regensburg as envoy to 
Maximilian II. Morone spent his closing years at 
Rome, where he had been appointed dean of the 
College of Cardinals. Ho rests in the Church of 
Santa Maria sopra Minerva. K. Bknflatr. 

UiBUooRipxi: The Vila by N. Benisbei, Modeni. ISSfi; 
C. Caatd, in AOi deli' Iililulo Lomharda. ISOS; f, Sclopia. 

potUKpiee. compte-mda. xe. 29-^8, 33I-3S9. xd. 49-82. 
Pbtw, 1809-70: Ranke, Poprt. i. 106, 122. 2M-266, iii.. 
n«. 22, 23, 39; Kt^ viii. 1929-30: and J. O. Sshellhnm, 
AmaniialrM tiimaiir, lii. B37-580. 14 vo1b„ Ldpsio, 172fi- 

HORONITES. See Ceibbtines. 

MORRIS, EDWARD DAFYDD: Presbj-terian ; 
b. at UUca, N. Y., Oct. 31, 1825. He was gradu- 
ated from Yale College (A.B., 1849) and Auburn 
Theological Seminary (1352). He was pastor of 
the Second Presbyterian Church, Auburn, N. Y. 
(1852-55), and of the Second Presbyterian Church, 
Columbus, O. (1855-07); professor of church his- 
tory in Lane Theolc^cal Seminary, Cincinnati 
(1867-74), and of theology in the same institution 
(1874-97). He was moderator of the Presbyterian 
General Assembly at Cleveland, O., in 1875, and in 


theology is " evangelistic, in u broad eeitae Cal- 
Vinialic, but catholic and irenic." He has writteQ: 
Outiines of Christian Doctrines (Cincinnati. 1S8CI); 
Ecdesiology (New York, 1885); /a there Salvation 
after Death* (New York, 1S87); ThiHy Yean in 
Lane (Cincinnati, 18!)7); Theology of the Wrtt- 
mtnahr SymboU (Philadelphia, 1000); and The 
PreabyUrian Church, New School (1901). 

MORRIS, JOHH GOTTLIEB: Lutheran; b. at 
York, Pa.. Nov, 14, 1803; d. at Lutherville. Md., 
Oct. 10, 1S95. Ha graduated from Dickinson Col- 
lege, Carlisle, Pa., 1823; studied at Princeton, N. J., 
Theological Seminary, 1826, then nt Gettysburg 
Theological Seroinary, was the founder of the First 
English Lutheran (Trinity) Church, Baltimore, 
Md., and ita paator, 1827-60; became librarian of 
the Pcabody Institute, Baltimore, 1860-64; was 
stated supply of the Third Lutheran Church of the 
same city, 1861-67; from 1834 he was lecturer on 
biology in Pennsylvania College; from 1874 he was 
pastor at Lutherville, Md.; and also lecturer on 
pulpit elocution and Biblical ecience In the Theo- 
logical Seminary, Gettysburg, Pa. With his brother 
he founded Lutherville Ladies' Seminary, and in 
1846 he aided in establishing the Evangelical AlU- 
ance (q.v.). He di^itinguiehed himself iu 
history, and belonged to numerous American and 
European Bcientihc socielies. He was the founder 
of the Lutheran Obmrrver in 1831, editor tfll 1833, 
then a contributor. He « 
arine De Bora (Philadelph 
the Deteribed Lepidoptera of North Ai 
Synopsis of the Described Lepidofitera of North A m- 
erica, part I. (both Washington, Smithsonian Insti- 
tution, 1860-62); The Lords Baltimore (Baltimore, 
1874); FiftyYeart in the Lutheran Mini^ry (ISli); 
Quaint Sayings and Doingi of Martin Luther (Phila- 
delphia, 1876); Bibliotheea Lutherarta: LUt of Pub- 
lications of Lutheran Ministers in the United Stales 
(1876); Journeys of Luther: their Relation to the 
Work of the Reformation (1880) ; Lulher at Wariburg 
and Coburg (I8S2); Lutheran Doctrine of the Lord's 
Supper (1884); Life Beminiscences of an Old Lu- 
theran Minister (1896; pp. 355 sqq., contains a list 
of his writings). He edited a translation of Knel' 
tin's " Life of Martin Luther " (1883); and assLsted 
in editing the EvangeliaU Review (Gettysburg, 

BlBUmHAFaT: Bnicin the Lift Rminitefru^i (ut rup.). 
ainiuJt: H. E. Jacobs, in American ChvreA Hitlorg Striti. 
iv. 330-390 rC piwini. N»« York, I8S3; H. E. Jiicobs 
and J. A. W. Hui, LxUlieran Ci/clapaiia, p. 329. ib. ISM- 
MOKRISOH, HEHRY CLAY: Methodist Epis- 
eopul {.South} bishop; b. near Clarksville, Tenn., 
May 30, 1842. He wa.s educated in the public 
schools, and received his classical and Hebrew 
training privately. After teaching school from 1860 
to 1863, he was licensed to preach, and in 1864 was 
chaplain of the Eighth Kentucky Mounted In- 
fantry, C. 8. A. In 1865 he was appoitiled to the 
Hiddletown Circuit, and later held pastorates at 
Bardstown, Ky. (1866-68), Eliiabethtown, Ky. 
(1868-69), Middletown, Ky. (1869-73); Shelby 
Street, Louisville, Ky. (1872-76) ; Broadway Church, 
Louisville (1876-80); Chestnut Street, Louisville 
(1880-84); Russelville, Ky. (1884-86), and the 

Firet Methodist Church, AUantu. Ga. (lS8ft-flO). 
From 1890 la 1898 he was a missionary secretary 
of his denomination, and in this capacity raised 
large funds and paid off the debt of the Board of 
Misciioiis. In 1808 he was elected bishop with head' 
quarters at New Orleans. 

MORRISON, JAMES DOW: Protestant Epis- 
copal miasiotmry bishop of Duluth; b. at Wad- 
dington, N. Y., Oct. 16, 1844. He waa educated 
at McGQl University, Montreal (A.B., 1865), and 
after studying under the canons of Christ Church 
Cathedral, Montreal, was ordered deacon in 1869, 
and ordained priest in the following year, after 
which he held poriahes at Hemmingford, P. Q. 
(1869-Tl), Herkimer, N. Y. (1871-75), and Og- 
densburg, N. Y. (1875-97), being also archdeacon 
ot Ogdensburg from 1881 to 1897. In 1897 he was 
consecrated &nt missionary bishop of Duluth. In 
1S<)8 he was Paddock lecturer at the General 
Theological Seminary, New York City. He ho8 
written Fundamental Church Principles (Milwaukee, 

MOBSISOK, ROBERT: The father of Protes- 
tant missions in China; b. at Buller's Green, Mor- 
pcth (15 m. n.n.w. of Newcastle), England, Jan. 5, 
1782; d. at Canton, China, Aug. 1, 1834. He had 
a decided inclination for study, took up Latin, He- 
brew, and theology under Rev. W. Laidler, and 
afterward attended Hoxton Academy in England, 
180;i-04. In 1804 he offered himself to the London 
Miasionaiy Society, and waa appointed the iirat 
missionary to China; entering their training insti- 
tute at Gosport, he took up the study of Chinese 
under a Chinaman resident there; was ordained 
Jan., 1807, and then sailed for Canton. He be- 
came interpreter for the East India Company (see 
China, II., 3, { 1) and assiduously engaged in the 
translation of the Bible into Chinese, and in the 
preparation of Chinese tracts and a dictionary. He 
revised and published a Chinese version of the Acts 
in 1811; issued an original Chinese catechism, and 
in 1815 a Chinese grammar which was printed by 
the Serampore press in India. In 1813 he com- 
pleted, with the assistance of William Milne (q.v.), 
the translation of the entire New Testament, the 
Gospels, the closing epistles from Hebrews and Rev- 
elation being the work of Morrison. He and Milne 
also made a version of the Old Testament, so that 
the entire Bible was printed in 1819. He also made 
a translation of the morning and evening prayers of 
the Church of England. His most laborious liter- 
ary work waa his Chinese Dictionary, published by 
the East India Company at an expense of £12,000 
(3 parts, Macao, 1815-23), a work of remarkable 
industry and scholarship. He also founded the An- 
glo<:binese College at Malacca, which, however, waa 
never very successful, and waa removed in 1845 to 
Hongkong. In 1824 he paid a visit to England, 
returning to China in 1826. His interest in educa- 
tional work is shown by his gift of a large Chinese 
library to University College, London, England, and 
he had a share in the establishment of the Bartlett's 
BuUdinp'i Language Institution, at London. After 
hirt death The Morrison Education Society waa 
founded iu his honor by merchimts interested in the 


Chinese for aupporting a school for Chinese youth. 
The school uus located at Hacoo, I8S8, and removed 
to Hongkong in 1842 (see Bhows, Sauitel Rob- 
bins). He was also the author of Hcriz Sinica: 
Traadationa from the Popular LUtrature of the Chi- 
WW (LoodoQ, 1812); A View of China for Phila- 
tegieal Purpoaai, Containing a Sketch 0/ Chinese 
ChroiuAogy, Geography, Goeernment and Customs 
(1817); Voa>i»daTy 0/ the Canton Dialect (3 parts, 
Harao, 1S2S); Memmrii of Rev. WUliam Milne, 
D.D., Late Misgionary to China . , . CampiUdfrom 
Dontmtnls Written by the Deteaaed; to which are 
added Occanonal Remarks (Malacca, 1824). Mr. 
Uorrison added to his literary and civil labors pri- 
vate efforts to spread the Gospel, the public procla- 
mation of the Gospel being forbidden. After hia 
death his remains were taken to Macao, where they 
■till rest, the site being nuirked by an appropriate 
inaciiption t^tifying to his devotion aa a missionary 
uid his eminence as a Chinese scholar. Although 
hia dictionary has been superseded by that of Samuel 
Wells Williams, his name nil] always have an hon- 
orable place beside the names of Martyn, Judson, 
Carey, Williams, and other workers in the heroic 
1^ of modern missions. 

BnuooninrT: LIvn are by Mn. E. MmriMiD, 2 vols.. 
LoDduii. 1830 (by hia ndow); a. W. WiUismi. in F. Piper, 
U^a of LtaOtr, ef 0\t CKunh UnivertoL cH. H. H. Mc- 
Cncken. pp. 8Ht-S37. PhilwielplM. 187B; W. J. Town- 
Hid. LoDdon. ISSS. Coniult alto W. W. Moaeley, Tin 
Oriffin qT Die Fint Jtf unon Id China. LoailoD, 1S4Z: ud 

Episcopal bishop of Iowa; b. at Ottawa, 111., Feb. 
J8, 1850. He was graduated from Illinois College, 
jBckB0n\'Tlle, III. {A.B., 1870), and the General 
Theological Seminary (1873). He wns ordered 
deacon in 1873 and was advaoced to tlie priest- 
hood in the following year. He was then rector of 
St, Paul's, Pekin, III. (1874-76) and of the Church 
erf the Epiphany, Chicago (1876-09), and in 1899 
was consecrated bishop of Iowa. 

MORSE. RICHARD CART; Presbyterian; b. at 
Hudson, N. Y., Sept- 19, 1841. He was educated 
at Yale (A.B., 1862), Union Theologvcul Seimnary 
(1865-66; graduated, 1867), and Princeton Theo- 
logical Seminary (1866-67). After being assistant 
editor of the New York ObsCTTer from 1867 to 1860, 
he was ordained to the ministry in 1869, and since 
that year has been general secretary of the intenia- 
tional committee of the Y. M. C. A. He has taken 
an active part in the extension of that organization 
both in the L'nited States and Canada, and in other 
partfl of the world, and is honorary American sec- 
retary of the World's Committee of the Y. M. 0. A. 
He has written Robert M. McBtimey, a Menuirial 
(New York, 189fl) ; Polity of Young Men's ChrUlian 
Aitaciations (1904); and Fifty Ycots of Federation 

MORTUAtN, m8rt'm6ii"i In law, the state of 
lands and tenements held by perpetual tenure. 
Since the alienation of church property is forbidden 
by ecclesiastical canons, and members of ecclesias- 
tical bodies were reckoned as dead persons in law, 
the phrase mortua manit>, " the dead hand," was 
used to e.vpress this aspect of the church aa a holder 

of property, and the term statutes of mortmain 
came to l^ig^ify the secular laws wliicli attempted 
to impose limitations upon the church's power of 
a&iuiring property. Such laws are found as early 
as the Carolingian period, and numerous civil enact- 
ments of the Middle Ages limit the amount of real 
property which may be held by churches or mon- 
asteries, largely for the reason that such property 
was exempted from feudal dues and services. The 
indifferent success of such legislation may be seen 
from various statements of the very large propor- 
tion of the land which waa iu ecclesiastical posses- 
sion. In England the Magna Chorta as revised and 
confirmed by Henry III. forbade the transfer of 
land to church corporutions by a l«nant without 
the consent of hia lord. The statute de religiosit 
of Edward I., enacted in 1279, forbade the acquisi- 
tion of land by clerics or others in such vAae that it 
should come into mortmain. The aim of this and 
subsequent laws of the aame king was to prevent 
the impoverishment of the nation by endowments 
wliich deprived the Statu of its due services under 
the feudal syslf m, and were based on the theory 
that the national church should share in the na- 
tion's burdens. The laws of mortmain were re- 
tained in the United States only in Pennsylvania, 
owing to the fact that there were no great re- 
ligious corporations, and because the feudal sys- 
tem never existed here. The growing desire to 
limit the rights and privileges of corporations 
has led to the enactment of laws in the United 
Suites and in other countries which more or less 
directly affect ecclesiastical bodies. A treatment 
of them, however, belongs rather to worka on law 
and jurisprudence than to one devoted to religion 
or theology. 

BiHijooRAPKi: O. D. Tmlor, Lob- o/ Charicie, and Mort- 
main. London. 1SS9; J. KawliiiHin, Nnlts cm I^ Morl- 
maia Aril. ib. 1ST7. Ths sUtute of 1279 Is in HeDdsnon. 

MORTOS, RATHARIEL: Colonial historian; b. 
in Leyden, Holland, 1612; d. in Plymouth, Mass., 
June 28, 16H5. He came to America in 1623; be- 
came Governor Bradford's assistant at Plymouth 
in the management of public affairs, and in 1645 
was appointed secretary of the Plymouth Colony. 
He was well read, and noted carefully the facta 
and events of the early days of the colony; neariy 
all its records were written by him. He wrote the 
valued New-England'a Memoriall: or a Brief Rela- 
tion of the moet Memorable and Remarkable Paasagea 
of the Providence of God, Manifested to the PlanterM 
of New-England in America; with Special Reference 
to the Firgt Colony thereof, Called New-Plymouth, at 
also a Nomination of Dirers of Ike most Eminent In- 
d,rumenta Deceased, both of Church and Common- 
wealth, Improred in the First Beginning and After' 
progress of Sundry of the Respective Jurisdictions 
in those Parts; in Reference unto Sundry Exemplary 
Passages of their Lives, and the Tim^ of their Death, 
Published for the Use arui Benefit of Present and 
Future Generations (Cambridge, 1669; 2d ed., Bos- 
ton, 1721; 6th ed,, Boston, I8.W). He wTote also 
in 1680 a Synopsis of the Church History of Pb/m- 
oath, which appeared in Ebenezer Hazard's His- 
loricul CoUections and in Alexander Young's Chron- 


ieUH of the Pilgrim SeUiera of Miumachunelta (2 vola., 
BoGlon, 1841^6). 

Bidltckihapiit: J. B. Felt, Ecclttiailical HM. >/ Nrv) Eno- 
land. 2 vols.. Bwlon. 1855-62; AppteUtn't Cuclopmlia of 
Amairan Bioftaphy. iv. 4110-430, New Yurk, 189S; W. 
Wnlkfir, Ttn New E<\gUitid Ltadert. pp. 17, 30. 3B, 44. ib. 


Cerman ProUistant exegeU; b. at Liiiiban (75 m. 
e. of Breslau) Nov. 30, 1736; A. at Leipsic Nov. 11, 
179:2. He received bis primary education at home, 
bia father being an instniotor in the Ijauban Lalin 
Bchool, At the University of Leipsic he came under 
the influence of J. A. li^esti (q.v.), and waa re- 
gurded as that teacher's best pupil. Some yeara 
vere Epent in private tutoring, during which at the 
bouse of Professor Ludwig, ooe of his patrons, he 
met Goethe. In 1701 he began giving lectures on 
Greek and Latin writers at Leipsic. Ho became 
profesaor extraordinary in 1768 and full professor 
in 1771. After 1780 he lectured on New-Testament 
excgesiB, and on tbe death of Emesti was trans- 
ferretl to the theological faculty. He afterward be- 
came rector and was four times dean between 1774 
and 1785. In 1787 he became a member of the 
consistory of Meissen. 

In his exegetical work Morus developed the 
nethoda of hiH teacher Drnesti, His De descrimine 
SCTisui et xignificationis in inlerprelantio, De causU, 
. quibug nifitur interprelatia atUgoriarum, and lus 
De neiu ngniJUalionum eiiudem verbi (in his Dia- 
aerlationet iheologiea et pltilologicae, vol. i., Leipsic, 
1787, vol. ii., ed. C. A. T. Keil, Leipaic, 1794) are of 
lasting worth. 

The Prteleiiionea (2 vols., 1794-1810), collected 
from his students' notebooks, has historical value 
only. His Epitome theologiir Chrietiana (liS'J) is 
unsyatemalJo, but free from the dogmatism of the 
period. A c^lection of his sermons was published 
at Leipsic, 1786. Moms also edited a number of 
Greek and Latin texts. He was of frail physique, 
unostentatious in his piety, modest, aiid a lover of 
peace. (G, MUller.) 

BmuoaHAPnT: The ikutobmitniphy □[ Uunis iipp«»d in 

Wwoiin/fir Pndiinr. vol. v.. 12 ZullichiHi, 1781- 

1701. Studin of bii liFe imcl «rvicH &rE by D. limit. 

Leip-iua 17B2; Voi«t. ib. 1792; J. ti. C. HiipfMT, ib. 1793; 

ud ADB. xxil. 342-344, 

UOSCHUS, mBs'cus: Greek theologian of the 6th 
century; d. at Home about SI 9, The place and date 
of his birtb are unknown and the details of his life 
are scanty. His name, according to the manuscripts, 
was Johannes, son of Moschux, but he is also known 
as "The Continent" or "The Monk." PhoUus 
records that he entered tbe monastery of St. Theo- 
ilosius in Jerusalem, tliat he then dwelt for a time 
among the hcrmiu of the Jordan valley, after which 
fae joined the monks in the new monastery of Great 
Sabas, near the Dead Sea. He journeyed to Egypt 
and the Great Oasis, accompanied by Sophronius, 
in the reign of Tiberius II. (578-587). Later still 
he went to Cyprus and thence to Rome where he 

The fame of Moschus rests upon his " Meadow," 
written at Rome and dedicated to Sophronius, 
probably his c<)mpiinion and later patriarch of Je- 
niaalem (d. G3S; see Sofhhonius, 2.), who lias in- 

deed been declared (as by Nicephorus, John of 
Damascus, and the second Nieene Council) to be 
the author of the " Meadow." This work, in its 
present form, is a mass of disconnected stories, 
based on older sources, including a " Paradise," 
perhaps identical with the " Old Folks' Book," 
doubtless a collection of apothegms. In ite orig- 
inal form, however, the " Meadow " seems to have 
been somewhat on tbe plan of the CoUationet ol 
Casaian or of the llialoria monachomm of Timotheus, 
recounting Muschus' personal eMperience with fa- 
mous ascetics or giving edifying stories told by 
them. The numerous tracUlike stories are prob- 
ably interpolations. The object of the work was a 
contribution to ascetic life, but its style, as com- 
pared with older writings of similar character, is 
vulgar and uncouth, though the chaotic condition 
of tlie manuscripts render even the original ext«nt 
of the work uncertain. Nevertheless the " Meadow " 
is a work of distinct importance, containing val- 
uable information on monastic life both in Pales- 
tine and in the other countries visited by the 
author, and also describing the liturgy, tlie polite 
ical relations of the day as disturbed by the inva- 
sions of Persians and Arabs, and giving hints of 
such phases of culture history as the development 
of the cult of Mary. The work long remained pop- 
ular in the monasteries and exercised on influence 
on later literature of similar character, filled as it 
was with the marvelous and assailing heresy in a 
manner which renders it not without importance 
for the history of dogma. (E. PaetrBCHEN.) 

BiBLioaRAPRT: K ecwd edition of (he work of Monchiu ii 
■ Litladmideratum; it ia printed with l^itiD trannl, in U/V. 
Uuivii., raproduced from K. ilu Duo. in Bihliolheea Gram- 
Lalina. pp. 1057-1160, preceded by a life, pp. iaS4-S7. 
Piui9,1624. Coniult further: KabriFiiu-Karlsi. SibI^o(A«a 
Orma. n. 124 sqq., H&mburg. 1807; Knimbubar, U*- 
MAifAtt, pp. 1S7-1S8. eC pa»im. 


Nniiie, Birtb. uid Childhood From Sinu to Kiidesh (| 6). 

(i 1). Trnn Kadxah lo Nebo (t 7X 

Youtb sod Early Manhood: Character (1 B). 

Ibe Divine Call (( 2). Moees lu lawgiver {i B). 

The PlaeuH of Egypt (| 3). A3 Hiatorian ajid Heliginua 

The Eiodns () 4). Founder II 10). 



The liberator of Israel from the Egyptian bond- 
age, to whom tradition unanimously refers the es- 
tablishmeiit of Israel's nationality, bears in the 
Bible the name Moshfh, which Ex. ii. 10 explains 
as a memento of his wonderful prcaer- 
I. Home, vulion in earliest childhood. The name 
Birth, and is probably of Egyptian origin, not 
Cbildhood. from the ICgyptian-Coptic mo, "water " 
and u/e, " saved," or mou, " water," 
and ski, "take," the latter accepted by the Sep- 
tuogint which has MdHefa, but rather from men, 
jnesu, " cliild," often used in proper names, as, e.g., 
Tavimen, Thothmes. In Ex. vi. 20 and Num. 
xxvi. 59, Amram and Jochebed, both of the tribe 
of Levi, arc called the parents of Moses. Jochebed 
is mentioned as a daughter of Levi (Ex. ii. 1 ; Num. 
xxvi. 50) and Anu^m as a grandson; this neither 
accords with the Mosaic murriage-laws (Lev. xvii. 
12) nor with the duration of the stay in Egypt. 
Indeed, according to Num. iii. 27 sqq,, Amram can 
scarcely have been Moaes' father. Ex. vii. 7 states 




that Aaron was older than Moses, as was also a 
sister (Ex. ii. 4), perhaps Miriam. The future lib- 
erator was born at the time of the severest oppres- 
sion of his people. The Pharaoh, apprehensive be- 
cause of the spread of the Semitic population in the 
northeast of the kingdom, had just conmianded 
that the newly bom male children of the Israelites 
should be cast into the Nile. Disregarding this 
stem command, the mother of Moses dared to keep 
her child, who was " exceeding fair " (Acts vii. 20), 
for three months; then she entrusted him to the 
care of the Almighty (Hob. xi. 23). The child, 
placed in an ark of bulrushes and watched by his 
sister, was discovered by the Pharaoh's daughter 
who wished to bathe in the river. It therefore 
seems that Moses saw the light in a royal capital 
on the lower Nile. Some think of Tanis (the Zoan 
of Num. xiii. 22, etc.)i but Bubastis is more prob- 
able, as the Hyksos rulers often resided there. The 
Pharaoh in question is not Rameses II., but a ruler 
of the eighteenth dynasty. A tradition (Eusebius, 
Praparatio evangelica, ix. 27; Eng. transl., i. 462 
sqq.y Oxford, 1903) names the savior of Moses 
Merris; the Rabbb give Bityah, derived from the 
Bithiah of I Chron. iv. 18; Josephus, however {Ant. 
II., ix. 5) calls her Thermuthis. The adoption of 
foreign children was not unusual at the royal court. 
Similar l^ends regarding the preservation of cele- 
brated men in their childhood prove nothing against 
the historical character of this event, only the un- 
doubtedly older recital concerning Sargon I. could 
be considered a prototype (see Babylonia, VI., 3, 

At the Egyptian court Moses was instructed in 

" all the wisdom of the Egyptians," and it is quite 
probable that he came into close touch T^ith the 
Egyptian priesthood, who were the guardians of 
wisdom and culture. Manetho (Jo- 
2. Youth sephus, Apian, i. 26, 28) even asserts 
and Early that he was a priest of Osiris in Heli- 
Xanhood; opolis and bore the name of Osarsiph, 
the Divme which he later changed to Moses. The 
CaU. Bible relates only one event of Moses' 
youth, the slaying of an Egyptian 
slave-driver (Ex. ii. 11 sqq.). He was obliged to 
flee from Pharaoh's wrath to the land of Midian, 
in the southeastern part of the Sinaitic peninsula. 
A courteous service rendered at a well, recalling 
Jacob's adventure, brought him into the house of 
the priest of Midian, who took him into his service 
and gave him his daughter Zipporah in marriage. 
This priest of Midian is called Reuel in Ex. ii. 18 (J), 
but Jethro in Ex. iii. 1 (E), etc.; the name Jethro 
may be an appellative (yUkro-yiihron, " superior- 
ity," " excellency "). Zipporah is hardly identical 
with the Ethiopian woman of Num. xii. 1, this text 
seeming to refer to a later event. Two sons, Ger- 
shom and Eliezer, were bom to Moses during his 
exile in Midian (Ex. ii. 22, x^'iii. 4). Tradition (Acts 
\u. 30) marks an interval J. forty years between 
the flight to Midian and the revelation from God; 
according to P (Ex. vii. 7), Moses was eighty years 
old when he appeared before Pharaoh. The vision 
at which he was entrusted with his office was 
vouchsafed hina at Mt. Horeb or Sinai (see Sinai). 
Here the angel of the Lord, or, according to the 

further recital, the Lord himself appeared to him 
unexpectedly. This appearance was not in human 
form but elemental, a flame of fire rising from a 
bush. Its supernatural quality was shown by the 
bush remaining unconsumed. The divine voice 
heard by Moses annoimced itself to be that of the 
God of the covenant with the fathers, and com- 
manded Moses to free his people and lead them, in 
the name of Yahweh, from the Egyptian bondage 
to Canaan (cf. Ex. iii. 14 with vi. 3). Moses was 
to demand of Pharaoh that the Israelites should be 
allowed to go three days' journey into the desert 
to sacrifice to their God, whom they could not serve 
in Egypt. In spite of his hesitation, Moses was 
forced to accept, and his power consisted in the 
fact that not his own will but that of Crod prevailed. 
Moses feared that he did not possess the requisite 
eloquence for his task and was told that Aaron 
should speak for him. He was therefore forced to 
conform to the will of God and depart for Egypt. 
On his way back, during a halt, an incident occurred, 
the account of which is obscure (Ex. iv. 24-26). 
He had failed to circumcise his son (the narrator 
seems to know of only one), although this usage 
had been made a law for Abraham and his descend- 
ants, and the text says that Yahweh attacked him, 
probably by an illness which roused his conscience. 
As the father was incapacitated by illness, Zip- 
porah cut off her son's foreskin and, casting it at 
Moses' feet, exclaimed: " A bloody husband art 
thou to me." These enigmatical words may sig- 
nify that by her act she had saved her husband's 
life. Another king now sat on the Egyptian throne, 
but the position of the Israelites was not improved. 
Moses was coldly received by his people, and found 
little appreciation for his mission. At first, indeed, 
they were grateful for the prospect of liberation, 
but w^hen the Pharaoh received ungraciously the 
demand for the festival in the desert and redoubled 
his exactions, the Israelites reproached Moses and 
Aaron with being mischief-makers. 

Before the plagues fell upon Egypt, Pharaoh was 
shown the change of the rod into a serpent, which 
was merely a symbol of what was to follow; it ac- 
corded with Egyptian usage, just as the plagues 
conformed to the natural conditions 
3. The of the land. Egyptian magic was to be 
Plagues conquered in the domain of its national 
of Egypt gods, so that all might see that Yah- 
weh was the real Lord of the land (Ex. 
viii. 19). On the traditional names of the Egyp- 
tian magicians, see Jannes and Jamb res. At the 
present day Egyptian snake-charmers are able to 
reduce these creatures to complete insensibility, so 
that they appear like rods. Since Pharaoh paid no 
heed to this sign, it was followed by the plagues, 
ten in number, which gradually forced the Egyp- 
tians to recognize the full power of the Lord. They 
are principally related .by JE, partly by P or by 
both sources in combination. The plagues suc- 
ceeded one another in the course of a few months, 
with short intervals to give the Pharaoh time for 
reflection. Firstly, at the command of the prophet, 
the Nile water was turned to blood; this signified 
a reddish hue of the water, accompanying its cor 
ruption, the latter a fearful blow for the Egyptian! 



as this element was for them so invaluable. The 
water sometimes becomes corrupt when the Nile is 
low, but the fact that it now grew exceptionally 
foul at the conunand of Moses was evident proof of 
Yahweh's agency. Seven days after the first (com- 
bine Ex. vii. 25 and viii. 1) followed the second 
plague, an invasion of frogs, especially favored by 
the stagnant water. These were the small rana 
NUoHca and Moaaica, indigenous in Egypt; by 
their unusual number and obtrusiveness they be- 
came a national calamity. The magicians also suc- 
ceeded in producing both these plagues but could 
not remove them, and the king had to seek help 
from Moses. As, however, the king relented only 
for the moment, the third plague ensued, that of 
gnats. These insects are always annoying in Egypt, 
but perhaps through the drying-up of the stagnant 
water, they now became a veritable scourge. Here 
the power of the magicians failed and they were 
obliged to acknowledge a divine agency. Since the 
ruler was still obdurate, the fourth, the plague of 
lice (Septuagint, kunomuia, '' dog-flies '0 followed. 
This infliction was so severe that Pharaoh was 
moved to consent that the Israelites should sacri- 
fice to God in Egypt; Moses wisely refused. The 
promise then given by Pharaoh in his extremity, 
that the Israelites should be permitted to make 
the three days' journey into the desert, was not 
kept when this plague was removed and so a fifth 
was sent, a terrible murrain. The plague of boils 
was the sixth and this afflicted even the magicians. 
All these visitations were on a gradually ascending 
scale; three others were of exceptional severity. 
Firstly, as the seventh plague, a destructive and 
even deadly hailstorm which, according to Ex. ix. 
31, took place at the end of January or the begin- 
ning of February. The plague of grasshoppers, the 
eighth, completed the misfortime, since they ap- 
peared in unprecedented numbers (Ex. x. 14). The 
king now consented to the departure of the adults, 
provided the children and the cattle remained, but 
no compromise was accepted and the ninth plague, 
of three days' darkness, ensued. This may be con- 
nected with the khamsin, which sometimes, usually 
in March, brings clouds of dust and obscures the 
sun. Pharaoh was now ready to let the children 
go also, only wishing to keep the cattle as a pledge. 
When this was refused, he again opposed his will to 
that of God and the tenth plague was inflicted, des- 
tined to break down his obstinate resistance. As 
the Egyptians would not recognize Yahweh's pa- 
ternal authority over Israel, his first-bom, he 
avenged himself by taking away the cherished first- 
bom of the land. Preparations were made to pro- 
tect Israel from the plague and also for a speedy 
departure. The visitation fell upon the homes of 
the Egyptians, and while the soimd of mourning 
was heard in every house, the Israelites marched 
forth, urged thereto by the terrified Egyptians, who 
showered gifts upon them so as to be rid of them 
the sooner. 

The f oast of the Passover was from this time a 
memorial of the preeervation from the destroying 
angel and of the hasty departure. The sanctifica- 
tioii of the fiiBt4xxm Is referred to the sparing of 
tbe finMMm of Imd in £kyp((Ez. xiiL 2, 11-16). 

The Exodus took place (P) on the fifteenth of the 
month Abib which from that time was to be coimted 

the first month (Num. xxxiii. 3; Ex. 
4. The xii. 2). The city of Raamses is men- 
Exodus, tioned as the point of departure, 

doubtless the city which the Israelites 
were forced to build (Ex. i. 11). The site is not de- 
termined; from Ex. xii. 31, it seems that the Pharaoh 
resided there. It was probably in Goshen, a little 
to the west or north of the first station Succoth, 
Egyptian Thuket or Thuku, originally the name of 
a district and then of its chief city, Pithom-Hier- 
opolis, the Tell Masbuta of to-day (cf. E. Naville, 
The Store City, in the Memoirs of the Egypt Explo- 
ration Fund; q.v.). The present Wadi Tumilat was 
traversed, where the mass of the Israelites joined 
the march. Etham was the second station (Egyp- 
tian, Khetem, " fortification "), a bulwark for pro- 
tection against attacks from the east; it was at 
" the edge of the desert." Here the route was de- 
flected from the natural coiu-se in a southerly and 
then in a northeasterly direction, so that the gulf 
lay between the Israelites and the desert. This 
gulf, which was afterward traversed, the " Reedy 
Sea," is the Gulf of Suez, an arm of the Red Sea 
(q.v.). Its characteristics corroborate the state- 
ments of the narrative, especially its sudden and 
strong tides, particularly when favored by the wind 
during the vernal equinox. If, as assumed above, 
the march was through the Wadi Tumilat, the pas- 
sage was probably by the Bitter Lakes, south of the 
present Ismailiya. Led by God's Pillar of Fire and 
Cloud (q.v.), the Israelites had moved southward 
from Etham. When the Pharaoh was informed of 
this, he realized from the continuance of their march 
that there was no hope of their return; at the same 
time, the direction taken led him to think that the 
leaders had no certain plan and that, hemmed in 
by the trackless desert, the throng could be easily 
overtaken and brought back. Already repenting 
of his consent, he started in pursuit with his char- 
iots. He encountered the Israelites encamped on 
the seashore to the west of the gulf; their position 
seemed hopeless. At the prayer of Moses, however, 
God showed a miraculous way of escape through 
the sea, the waters of which divided, allowing the 
Israelites to pass dry-shod. Eager to secure their 
prey, the Egyptians hastened after them the same 
night; in their passage, a panic arose among their 
chariots, caused by the fiery reflection from the 
pillar, and, to complete the catastrophe, the waters 
returned and overwhelmed the Egyptians. As a 
natural cause, a strong northeast wind may be con- 
jectured which left the ford dry at ebb-tide while 
a shift of the wind to the contrary direction swelled 
the returning flood-tide. The sublimest monument 
to this event was raised by Moses, in his magnifi- 
cent song (Ex. XV. 1 sqq.), the authenticity of which 
can not rightly be disputed, although some addi- 
tions may have been made to it. The rescue of the 
Israelites at the Red Sea marks the birth-hour of 
the people of Yahweh; the later prophetic and 
poetic literature looked back to this event as the 
climax of the deliverance and it became a type of 
salvation (Isa. xL 15, IxiiL 11 sqq.; Ps. Ixxviii., cv., 




The " mount of God " formed the goal of IsraePs 
further journey. This mountain has been foimd in 
the land of Edom, or on the western coast of Ara- 
bia. It is, however, more probable 

5. The that the traditional view which places 
ICarch it in the southern part of the Sinaitic 

to StnaL peninsula is correct; in this case, the 
Israelites went eastward towards the 
Gulf of Akaba. Between the passage of the Red 
Sea and Sinai, a number of stations are men- 
tioned where a halt was possibly made for a longer 
or shorter period. Tradition places the scene of the 
triumph over Pharaoh at Ayun Musa, whence the 
journey may have been pursued for three days 
through the desert of Shur until Mara was reached 
(perhaps Hawara, sixteen hoiu^ south of Ayun 
Musa). According to the ancient list of stations 
(Niun. xxxiii.) the Israelites encamped again at the 
Red Sea between Elim and the desert of Sin, per- 
haps in the beautiful Wadi Tayibe; Rephidim is 
generally thought to be the fruitful Wadi Feiran, 
at the foot of Moimt Serbal. The desert was a fit 
place for Israel's education, since the people was 
here dependent upon its God for guidance and 
nourishment. Nevertheless, suspicion and want of 
faith prevailed, held in check only by overpower- 
ing signs of God's fatherly care; the pillar of cloud; 
the gift of manna, of water from the rock and of 
quails; the victory over the Amalekites through 
the prayers of Moses; and finally the sublime mani- 
festation of God on Sinai. As with the wonders 
performed in Egypt and in the passage of the Red 
Sea, a connection with local phenomena can be 
found for these happenings. Manna is a common 
vegetable product on the western side of the Sina- 
itic peninsula, and flocks of quails frequently alight 
here in the spring; both Jebel Musa and Serbal 
tower in imposing majesty, especially during a 
storm. All this, the well-authenticated battle with 
the Amalekites, and allusions in early lyrics serve 
to confirm belief in the historical quality of these 

On Sinai, where the Lord permitted the people 

to gaxe upon his glory and hear his voice> the Law 

was given through the mediation of Moses. After 

nearly a year's sojourn at this place 

6. From (cf. Num. x. 11 with Ex. xix. 1), the 
Sinai to Israelites resumed their march, led by 
Y»A^y\ Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses 

(Num. X. 29 sqq.), and moved north- 
ward into the desert of Paran. On this long jour- 
ney the people often murmured and were sternly 
punished; when, finally, they refused to advance 
toward Canaan, intimidated by the reports of spies 
sent thither, not even the appeals of Moses to God's 
mercy could shield them from the judgment that 
that generation should not see the land of promise. 
A wilful attempt to invade Canaan failed, and the 
Israelites were forced to turn back to the Red Sea. 
Much obscurity covers the forty years' wanderings 
in the desert; naturally, the people were not con- 
tinually changing their abode. A longer residence 
in Kadesh (see Negeb, The) is shown by Deut. i. 
46; Judges xi. 17; cf. Num. xx. 1, 14; this place 
may have been the religious and civil center, while 
the people wandered in the neighboring regions. 

Among the events of these years was the rebellion 
of Korah (Num. xvi.). 

In the first month of the fortieth year, the Israel- 
ites were still in Kadesh. Although the time had 
come for entrance into the promised land, because 
of the opposition of the Edomites and Amalekites 
they did not follow the most direct course thither 
but made a wide ddtour and proceeded 

7. From by Mt. Seir to the country west of the 
Kadesh Jordan. As at this time even Moses 
to Nebo. and Aaron lost faith (Num. xx. 2-12), 

they were not permitted to live to see 
the realization of their hopes. On one occasion, the 
murmurings of the people were punished by veno- 
mous serpents; Moses then saved the Israelites by 
setting up a brazen serpent on a pole (see Ser- 
pent, Brazen). This image was later used as an 
idol (II Kings xviii. 4). Arrived at the Arnon, the 
Israelites encountered the Amorites, led by Sihon 
and Og, and defeated them twice; by these victories 
the coimtry west of the Jordan was won. Though 
the Moabites were well pleased with the downfall of 
their enemies the Amorites, they sought to thwart 
the plans of the Israelites without risking open op- 
position, and called the famous magician Balaam 
(q.v.) to their aid, but his magic was imavailing. 
They and the Midianites had better success with 
the sensual temptations of their Baal-worship, and 
Israel's licentiousness was punished by a pestilence. 
Moses died at the end of the forty years, after re- 
signing his command to Joshua and dividing the 
conquered territory among the tribes of Reuben, 
Gad, and half Manasseh on the condition that they 
should aid their brethren in the conquest of the land 
beyond the Jordan. In a prophetic song, he fore- 
told the future of his people (Deut. xxxii.) and 
blessed the different tribes as Jacob had done (Deut. 
xxxiii.); he was permitted to gaze from Mt. Nebo 
over the promised land and then died, at the age of 
120 (Deut. xxxiv. 7; P), and the children of Israel 
mourned for him thirty days. 

The character of Moses, as presented by the Bible, 

shows that from his youth he was endowed with a 

high sense of righteousness and with a warm love 

for his people. The fact that he wag 

8. Char- able, without material power, to lead 
acter. his people for forty years, proves not 

only his mental vigor, but also his pa- 
tience and kindness; and yet he earned but little 
gratitude. Even his brother proved imtrustworthy 
(Ex. xxxii.) and, with Miriam, intrigued against 
him (Num. xii.); but he was never embittered and 
is rightly called " meek above all men which were 
upon the face of the earth " (Num. xii. 3). This 
did not, however, imply any weakness, for he could 
be stem and inflexible where the honor of his God 
was at stake (Ex. xxxii. 27). He was a prophet 
great alike in w^ord and deed (Hos. xii. 13), one 
who saw God not merely in dreams and visions 
but " face to face " (Num. xii. 6 sqq.). The glory of 
God was reflected on his countenance so that he was 
forced to veil it (Ex. xxxiv. 29 sqq.; Keren, " horn, 
ray," cf. R. V. margin, is incorrectly rendered cof- 
ntda fades, " homed appearance," in the Vulgate, 
hence the pictorial representations of Moses with 
horns). His historical importance can not be too 




highly estimat^Kl; not only did he liberate Israel 
and thus help it to a national oxiHtence, hut he 
was, according to a unanimous tradition which no 
criticLsm can overtlirow, tiie human author of the- 
ocnicy in its national form. 

To what extent the law as existent in the Pen- 
tateuch is of Mosaic origin can not be satisfactorily 
determined, but Most's may Siifely he regarded as 
the originator of the divine ordinances 

9. Moses contained therein. It is certain that 

as Law- he was better qualified for tliis work, 
giver. both by education and by divine guid- 
ance, than any other Israelite. As 
a legislator educated in Kgypt, it may be assumed 
that he wrote down the divinely ins[)ired laws from 
the ver^' beginning, or at legist the essential por- 
tions, lleminiscences of Egypt abound in the law 
(Ex. XX. 2; Lev. xLx. 34; Num. xv. 41; Deut. v. 
15). The legislation does not imply a complex 
civilization, but is adapted to a people devoted to 
agriculture and cattle-raising (cf. Ex. xxi., xxii.) 
and so rude as to require the sternest repressive 
laws (cf. VjX. xxi. 24-25); at the same time it 
breathes a simple and childlike faith. Nevertheless, 
the law, in its present form, was as little written 
at one time as were the historical parts of the Pen- 
tateuch. There were additions and supplementary 
laws which may belong to post-Mosaic times (see 
IIkxateuch). For example, it is clear that the 
royal laws did not exist in Samuel's time (I Sam. 
viii.), rndeed, they seem to have b(»en composed by 
him (cf. P. Kleiner t, Das Deutcronotnium und der 
DeuteronomikeTf Bielefeld, 1872). The conclusion 
is legitimate that not only was the oral tradition 
from Moses' time WTitten down and edited later, 
but that prophet-s who proclaimed laws in the spirit 
of God incorporated these in the code of Moses. 
Still the foundation of the Torah is Mosaic, above 
all, its simplest form, the Decalogue (q.v.); this, 
however, heads the Book of the Covenant (Ex. xx.- 
xxiii.), which is especially archaic and is arranged 
on the same numerical scheme. This section is now 
genendly regarded as the oldest part of the Penta^ 
teuch. Deuteronomy is in clearer accord with it 
than are the remaining laws in Exodus, Leviticus, 
and Numbers, and although in its present form it 
must be assigned to a later period, we do not doubt 
that Mosaic tradition told of a parenetic repetition 
of the law in the fields of Moab; in thought and 
spirit this body of laws is thoroughly Mosaic. The 
remaining Elohistic legislation, more priestly than 
prophetic in its character, may have been edited, 
as the modem theory assumes, at a late period. 

Moses may also be regarded as the first Hebrew 

historian. Naturally, the story of his life and work 

as given in the Pentateuch can not be by him, but 

the recital of the battle with the Amalekites (cf. 

Ex. xvii. 14) and the list of stationa 

10. As (Num. xxxiii. 2 sqq.) are stated to be 

Historian from his hand. These ancient texts 
and make it probable that Mosee recorded 

Religious historical events, more eq)eeiaUy nnoe^ 

Founder, besides Moses' song, there an thrae 
songs in Num. xzL unquestiQiisbH' 
longing to this time. The tablets of TpT 
(see Amarna Tablbtb) prow thai 

were written down in the outlying provinces of 
Egypt in this period. The blessing of Moses (Deut. 
xxxiii.), despite critical attacks, is probably au- 
thentic (verses 1-5 show a later hand) and the 
Song of Moses seems to be by him and is unmis- 
takably related to Ps. xc. As the mediator of the 
Old Covenant, Moses occupies an exceptional place 
in the New Testament also, not simply as the high- 
est authority for the Jews (e.g., John v. 45, viii. 5, 
etc.), but also for and the apostles. The es- 
sential fact was not his authorship of the Penta- 
teuch (Luke xxiv. 44; Mark xii. 2C), but his theo- 
logical significance as the founder of the divine rule 
under the law of which he was the mediator. The 
Old Testament is personified in Moses in its posi- 
tive and prophetic significance (John. v. 45-46) 
and in its temporary and incomplete quality (cf. 
Matt. XLX. 8; II Cor. iii. 7; Gal. iii. 19). " The law- 
was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by 
Jesus Christ " (John i. 17). C. von Orelli. 

Biblioorapht: The pubjc»ct », of course, treat<K] in the 
works on the history of iHmel namcnl under Ahab; and 
Ihrabl, HittTORY OP. Further dincussion will be found 
in the commentaries on ICxodus to Deuteronomy, and in 
the works on O. T. theology; and his relation to the laws 
and narrative of the Hexateuch is set forth in the works 
on Biblical Introrluction (q.v.) and on the Hexateuch 
(q.v.). Further Ught may be gained in this connection 
from the literature given under Hammurabi and His 
CouB. (Consult further: J. Reiner, Motet und 9ein Werk, 
Berlin, 1907; B. Beer, Lehen Mows nach Auffaa»ung der 
jadxBchen Sage, Leipsic, 1803; A. P. Stanley, JewUh 
Church, i. 86-173. London, 1863; G. Rawlinson, Mo9e», 
his Life and TimeM, ib. 1887; F. Vigouroux, /xi Bible et 
d/couverte% modemea, ii. 280 502, Paris, 1896; K. Budde, 
Religion of Israel to the Exile, New York, 1899; D. G. 
Hogarth, Authority and Archaeology ^ pp. 64-79, London, 
1899; J. W. liothstein, ^fo9es aU Menach und Prophet, 
Erlangcn, 1901; H. P. Smith, O. T. History, pp. 65 65, 
New York, 1903; E. Stucken, Astralmuthen der HebrOer^ 
part v., Moae, I^ipaic, 1907; C. F. Kent. Student's O. T„ 
vol. i., iv. 1-48, New York, 1907; P. Vols, Mose. Bin 
Beitrag zur Unternuchung aber die UntprHnge der israeliti- 
schen Religion, Tilbingen, 1907. For Mohammedan views: 
G. Weil, The Bible, Koran and the Talmud, London. 1846. 
For the Assumption of Moses see Pbkudepiorapila, III., 6, 
and cf. Charles' ed. of that work, pp. xiv.-xvii., London, 
1897. Ckinsult further: DB, iii. 438-448; EB, iii. 3203-19; 
JE, iz. 44-67; F. Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, xxvii. 
1190-1216. Paris, 1906. 

SIS). See Armenia, II., § 3. 

German Lutheran church historian; b. at LObeck 
Oct. 9, 1604 or 1695; d. at Gottingen Sept. 9, 1755. 
He attended the gymnasium at Labeck 1707-12, 
where interest in his mother tongue and a fondness 
for poetry seems to have been awakened, and in 
1716 he entered the University of ICiel, and as a 
student attracted the attention not only of his pro- 
fessors, but also of men like Leibnitz, Buddeiis, and 
Lacroie. In 1719 he became a member of the fac- 
ulty of phfloBophy, and in 1723 accepted a call as 
profesBor to Helmstftdt. In 1726 he became abbot 
of Marienthal, 1727 of Michaelstdn. In 1729 he 
WM'entnttted with the leadership of all school 
afbin and obtained a deeisive influence over the 

tobi fllmnili. In 1726 he was induced to promise 

^ Wthont the eonaent of the 

vidinon the main 

f , the infhienofl 




of which was rapidly waning before the newly es- 
tablished institution at Gdttingen. Although he 
could not go to Gdttingen, he was very active in 
the organization of the theological faculty there, 
drew up its statutes and assisted in the appoint- 
ment of its professors. It was only in 1747 that he 
was enabled to accept a call to the new university 
as its first and only chancellor. But in spite of his 
high position, he did not enjoy the same authority 
and freedom at Gdttingen as at Helmst&dt. 

Mosheim was not only the most learned theo- 
logian in the Lutheran Church of his day, he was 
also one of the first German authors and scholars 
of his age. His style was pure, elegant, fluent, and 
felicitous, whether in Crerman or Latin. This es- 
thetic quality was fostered by his early acquaint- 
ance with the literature of England, France, and 
Italy, to which was chiefly due the breadth of view 
which enabled him so to further the theological sci- 
ence of his day, especially in church history. As a 
theologian, he occupied an intermediate position 
between the extremes of pietism and deism. He 
was opposed to the confessional orthodoxy on the 
ground that theology was thus excluded from sci- 
entific culture. But on the other hand, he was one 
of the first in Germany to attack the deists and the 
authority of the reason. Although Mosheim's im- 
portance lies largely in his many-sidedness by which 
he fructified the whole field of theology, his his- 
torical works display best the range of his learning 
and his large horizon, as well as the minuteness of 
his (^>servation and his attention to detail, his terse 
delineation, and his faithful representation of lights 
and shadows. He collected his earlier treatises on 
church history such as VindicicB antiques Chris- 
tianorum disciplincB (Kiel, 1720) in his Observa- 
tiones sacrce et historico-crUicce (Amsterdam, 1721), 
and in his Dissertations ad historiam ecclesiasticam 
periinenies (1732-43). He investigated compre- 
hensively the history of religion and of the Church 
in his Latin translation (with notes, Jena, 1733) of 
Cudworth's Intellectual System. He treated ques- 
tions of the history of the early Church such as the 
date of the apologies of Tertullian and Athenagoras, 
and the influence of Platonism upon the Church, 
and touched other spheres of church history as may 
be seen from Historia Tartararum ecdesiastica 
(Helmst^t, 1741) and Erzdhlung der neuesten 
chinesischen Kirchengeschichie (Rostock, 1748). 
He sought to popularize church history by his trans- 
lation of the eight books of Origen against Celsus 
(Hambuiig, 1745). He wrote also histories of here- 
sies, under the titles, Versuch einer unparteiischen 
Kctzergeschichie (Helmstadt, 1746); and Ander- 
vpeiiiger Versuch einer voU^ndigen und unpartei- 
ischen KeUergeschichie (ib. 1748). As early as 1726 
he had written a comprehensive exposition of church 
history under the title, InstUutiones historic ecdesi- 
asticcB Navi TestamenH. The edition of 1737 was in 
1741 enlarged by the remaining portion of the his- 
tory of the later Church. His Institutiones historice 
CkrisHanm maiores (Helmst&dt, 1739) was intended 
to be more detailed, but Mosheim finished only the 
first cenlury. The want was supplied to a certain 
extent by his Commentarii de rebus Christianarum 
QTde Constantinum Magnum (Helmstlkit, 1753; 

Eng. transl. by R. S. "Vidal, Commentaries on the 
Affairs of the Christians before . . . Constaniine the 
Great, 3 vols., London, 1813-15) which is his most 
mature accomplishment in church history. Almost 
immediately before his death there appeared his In- 
stitutiones historicB ecdesiasticce antiques et recen- 
tioris (ib. 1755; Eng. transl. by A. Maclaine, An 
Ecclesiastical History, 2 vols., London, 1765, 2d ed., 
6 vols., 1768; and by J. Murdoch, Institutes of 
Ecclesiastical History, 3 vols., 1832, ed. by W. Stubbs, 
3 vols., London, 1863). Mosheim's importance as a 
church historian rests upon the fact that he set a 
higher mark for the church historian and tried to 
reach it. 

Mosheim made contributions to nearly every 
branch of theological science. He left conunen- 
taries on the New Testament and works on theo- 
logical encyclopedia, dogmatics, polemics, church 
polity, and homiletics. His most important work 
in the department of systematic theology was his 
Sittenlehre der heiligen Schrift (5 vols., Hclmstildt, 
1735-53; vols, vi.-ix. added by J. P. Miller). As 
a preacher he was much admired, and his sermons, 
published in 7 vols. (1725 and often) were esteemed 
as models. (N. Bonwetsch.) 

BiBLioaRAPHT: A list of his writings was left by himself 
in his NotUia acriptorum ... a MoMhemio^ HoImstiUit, 
1731, cf. the preface to the Helmstildt, 1764, ed. of hin In- 
atitutionet, and to the Eng. ed. of ills Inatitulea by Stubbs, 
London, 1863. Accounts of his life and writings are in 
J. M. Gesner, Biographia academiea Gottingenaia^ ed. J. N. 
Eyrijig. vol. i., Halle, 1868; J. G. Meusel, Lexicon der vom 
1760 hi* 1800 veratorbenen teuiachen SchriftateUer^ ix. 
348-364, 15. vols., Leipsic. 1802-16; E. Rdssler, Die 
OrUndung der UniveraiUU OuUingen, Gdttingen, 1855; 
ADB, xxii. 395 sqq.; F. A. E. Ehrenfeuchter, in GftUinger 
Profeaaoren, Gotha, 1872; K. Heussi, Die Kircheng^ 
achichtaachreibung J. L. von Moaheim^ Gotha, 1904; idem, 
J, L. Moaheim, Tabingen, 1906. 

MOSQUE (Arab, masjid, " a house of prayer ") : 
A Mohammedan place of worship. The first one was 
built by Mohammed at Medina, in a graveyard op- 
posite the spot where his camel knelt on his public 
entrance into that city. The most famous mosques are 
Masjid al Nebi (" Mosque of the Prophet ") at Me- 
dina, replacing the original one; Al-Hamram at Mec- 
ca, enclosing the Koaba (q.v.); Santa Sophia in Con- 
stantinople, originally a Greek basilica; the Mosque 
of Achmed, in the same city; that of Omar, in the 
liaram enclosure at Jerusalem; the Great Mosque, 
at Damascus; the mosque at Hebron; and the 
alabaster mosque of Mehemet Ali, at Cairo; the 
most elaborate is the Great Mosque at Delhi, built 
by Shah Jehan (1631-37). Mosques are found in 
every Mohammedan settlement, and vary in cost 
and beauty as do churches; but in general features 
they are alike, and consist of a domed building, a 
court with a fountain, in which ablutions are per- 
formed prior to entering, a minaret or tower, from 
which the muezzin calls the faithful to prayer. 
Inside they are open spaces, devoid of pictorial or- 
namentation, except by quotations from the Koran, 
often beautifully done, upon the walls. They con- 
tain the mihrab (a niche surmounted by a vaulted 
arch), placed in the direction of Mecca; and the 
minbar, or platform pulpit, upon which the minis- 
ters stand during service. The mosque is a com- 
posite building, in that its dome is Byzantine, its 



minaret is the Christian campanile, witliaut Its bell, 
while the court is like a ichann. In connection with 
mosques are schools where the Koran is taught. 
In the Mosque Al-Azhar at Cairo is the great uni- 
versity of the MohammednDa, wliither students 
come from all parts of their world, and whence they 
are sent to propagate their faith. Other establish- 
menta, benevolent in character, are also connected 
with mosques. 

BlBUOutuFHT: Beaidn the Benernl workf given under 
ABCHiTEniiiiK, consult: J. FerguMon, Indian and Eait- 
rm ArcliUecturt. London, 1876; idem. Ilitt. nf Ardtxln- 
(urc. ib. 1803; G. de Prengly. VArAUrrtxm df Anba, 
Puis. 1842; Fruii-Fulia, Die Bavktimt da Iilam. Dum- 
■Udt, 1S96; It. Hnrrniann. Dir BaatunsI da AUtrlunu 
and da Itlami im Milltlallrr. Leipsic, 1904: H. P. dpicm. 
ArekUtttun Eait and Wal. Liindun, 1904. 

MOTET. See Sacred Muarc, II., 2, S 3. 

MOTT, JOHH RALEIGH: Methodist lajTnan, 
leader in the Young Men's ChriKttan Association 
movement; b. at Livingstone Manor, N. Y., May 
25, 1865. He studied at Upper Iowa University, 
but was graduated from Cornell University, 1888; 
the same year he became student secretjuy of the 
international committee of the Y. M. C. A. and 
chairman of the executive committee of the Stu- 
dent Volunteer Movement; since IS!)5 he has also 
been general aecretary of the World's Christian 
Federation, sinee 1808 secretuiy of the foreign de- 
partment of the international committee of the 
Y. M. C. A., and since I'JOl associate general sec- 
retary of the same. He has been most efficient in 
promoting the foreign mission enthusiasm among 
young people, and organizes misHionury conferences 
in all parts of the world with marked skill. He en- 
joys a commanding position among the leaders of 
modem evangelization. He has written: Strategic 
Points in Ihe World's Conquer (New York, 1897); 
Thf Evangelization of the World in thit Generation 
(11)00); Christians of Reality (Shanghai, 1902); 
The Pastor and Modem Mitaione (New York, 11)04) ; 
and The Future Leadership of the Church (liK)!)). 

HOUIE, GEORGE EVAHS: Anglican hishop in 
Central China; b. at GillJngham (24 m. n.e. of 
Dorchester), Dorsetshire, England, Jan. 28, 182S. 
He was educated at Corpus Christi College (B.A., 
1850), and was ardei«d deacon in 1851 and ordained 
prieat in the following year. He was curate at 
Kordington, Dorset (18ol-55); chaplain of the Dor- 
set County Hospital (1855-57) ; a missioaary, under 
the auspices of the Church Hissionary Society, at 
Ning-po and Hangchow, China, from 1857 to 1878; 
and curate of West StafToni (1878-*)). In 1880 he 
was consecrated missionary bishop in Central China, 
his diocese covering the provinces of Keang-su, Cheb- 
kiang, An-hwi, Huipeh, and parts of Keang'K and 
Hunan, holding this position till 1907, when he be- 
came missionary for the Church Misaionaiy Sadetf 
at Hangchow, China. He has published Faith and 
Duty (sermons; Shanghai, 1902). 

England, bUhop of Durham; b. at Dcnrebestor, Dv^ 
setshire, Dec. 23, 1841. He was eduoBt«d at Tim- 
ity College, Cambridge (B.A., 1864), when hA wu 
fellow from 1865 to ISSl. He was aesstant mMtn 
»t Marlborough College (1865-67), assiaUnt oaiW 

of Fordington, Dorset (1867-73, 1877-80), dean of 
Trinity College (1873-77), first principal of Ridley 
HaU, Cambridge (1881-99), and Norrisian profes- 
SOT of divinity at Cambridge (1899-1901). In 1901 
he was consecrated bishop of Durham. He was also 
select preacher at Cambridge in 1880, 1882, 1S91, 
1894, 1896, 1899, and 1900, and at Oxford in 1895, 
as well as honorary chaplain to the queen in 1898- 
1901 and to the king since the latter year. In the- 
ology he is " deeply attached to the main positloos 
and traditions of the English Reformation, a hum- 
ble beUever in the divine authority of the Hcdy 
Scriptures, and in later years greatly influenced by 
the Keswick a 

Amoiui bin nunwrous work* lire; Apatto al PKerit (Cain- 
bridfie, 1865); Pirmi from SubitcU Cmntcled viA Iht Ad* 
of Ihe AfotOa (London. 1869); Fordinelon StrmonM (1883); 
ChrittianxtM, a SUiru nf Antiocli, and Otiirr Pntmt (1883): 
JiaHfyim KighltounuH (188S); ThouehU on [Tnum wid 
Chritt (18851; Thau^hU on the Spiritual Life (1887): The 
Ckrittian-' Viclvrv orer Sin {IBSJy. The Nem Birth {laSS); 
Oatliaei of Chrietian Doctrine (1889); Secret Prauer (1889); 
The Net and At Deliveranr* (1889): Vtni Creator (1890); 
The Cup qf liie Covenant (1890); Daniel.- or, Ihe Secret </ 
Conlinuance (1890): Life in C*™( and for Chriet (1890); 
The Oak of Ephrah (IS91): Al Ihe IIolv Communion (1803); 
Jeeue and the Raurrcction (1893): Chorla Simeon (1895): 
Grace and Oodlinta |I805>; In Ihe Houie of Ihe Pilgrimage 
(ISBB); The Sacrament of Bapliem (18B6); Praiwn and 
Promiea (1S0«I; PhUippian Sludia (1897); Colatian 
Stadia (.\S9&): Our Prautr-Book 11098); Confatiaa IIBM): 
On the Holv Ci»nniUFii'ci« (ISOO); Out Great High Prient, 
(1800); Ephreian Studia (.l-iOO)-. The Scent of Ae Pretence, 
and other Sermoni (lOOOJ; The Evangtlirat Sdiaal in Ae 
Church of England I190\y. From Sumlau to Sundav (1903); 
Juetiflcaiionbg FailhiiWyS): Temptation and Eeiape (1003}; 
Imilatione and Tranilaliom a90*): The School of Suffering 
(1905); Mil Brethren and Companione, and other Sermon* 
(1005); Srcond EpieOe to TimoAv aaOS); Holineu by Faith 
(1908); Scene* in the Lift of our Lord (1W)7); The High 
PricMly Praucr: a desolional Commenlarj/ on the 17IA Chapter 
of St. John (1907); Chriefs Witnta totheUftto Com, and 
Othrr Srrmone (19081; Faith. iU Nature and Work (1909): 
uid Memagei from Ihe Epielle to the HAreae (1909). He Uks- 
wine prepnmt for The Cambridge Bible the volimua on 
Romvis (Cambridge. 1879). Epbeeuuu (18Sfl). Philippiuu 
(1889), scdColoniana and Philemun (1893): for The Ezpoei- 
tor't Bible the volume on Rnmuui (London. 1894): and for 
the Cambridge Greek TeMammt Iha volume on PhilippuuH 
((^wnbiidge, 1897). 

b. al Leek (42 m. n. of Birmingham. Eng.) Mar. 14, 
1835; d. at Cambridge Feb. 5, 1898. The son and 
grandson of Wesleyan preachers, he was educated 
at Wesleyan schools, at Woodhouae Grove School, 
near Leeds, until he was fifteen, when he entered 
Wesley College, ShefGeld. In 1861 he matriculated 
in London Uoiveraity. In 1853 he beoame a roas- 
ter in a private school in Davonpcni; be graduated 
with honors in London Univarai^ (BA., 1854; 
H.A., 1856). From 1864 till 1858 ha ma mathe- 
matical mooter at Queen'i Oolkgg^ Tumbm. Id 
1S68 he entered tbe WerieTin lulukli y , bo^ w in 
tbe judgmant of tbe OonleranM ba WM batter fitted 
for toaiahliig (hia tatp 




Xoamliiff Onstonui 

fr&cfechjses of his ministerial brethren to a high de- 
i7^&e« He was elected into the Legal Hundred in 
IST^^ which was a singular honor for so comparsr 
^^^Ay young a man, and in 1890 he was elected 
P*^^sident of the Wesleyan Conference. His schol- 
^^y labors were incessant and well directed, 
^^^■^liematics had been his early choice, but it was 
^^ tlie best Greek scholar among English Wesleyans 
^^ V^ day that he will be remembered. He was not 
Pt-olific as an author mainly for the reason that he 
^^^<i idways so much teaching to do and because he 
^-^^k infinite pains with his Uterary work, and by 
T^^erence did work requiring infinite pains if it 
^ere to be well done. He made his mark first by 
a fine translation of Winer's Grammar of New Tes- 
tament Greek (Edinburgh, 1870) which superseded 
^t by Edward Masson (1859). In 1870 he was 
selected as representative of the Wesleyans on the 
Bible Revision Committee and served very zeal- 
ously in the New Testament Company. His inter- 
est in the general subject of Bible revision led to 
his preparing a brief but excellent History of the 
English Bible (London, 1878). His critical and exe- 
getical studies were also well displayed in the com- 
mentary on Hebrews which he contributed to 
Bishop Ellicott's New Testament Commentary for 
English Readers (1879), and that on John, in co- 
operation i/rith William Milligan, in Philip Schaff's 
Popular Illustrated Commentary on the New Testa- 
ment (Edinburgh, 1880). Shortly before his death 
he appeared as editor with Alfred S. Geden of A 
Concordance to the Greek Testament according to the 
TexU of Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf and the Eng- 
lish Revisers (1897), but in his prefatory note he 
disclaimed more than a consultative position. So, 
thou^ his separate publications were few, their 
quality was high and he will not quickly be forgot- 
ten. His versatility, his accomplishments, and his 
spirituality endeared him to his contemporaries. 

Bibuoorapht: W. F. Moulton. Wiaiam F. MouUon: a 
Memoir, toith a Chapter on ihia) Biblical Work and Opin^ 
ion» by JamM Hope Moulton^ New York, 1890. 

MOiniT OF OLIVES. See Jerusalem, I. 

Signs of Mourning (f 1). 
Explanations of Sohwally, 

Frey, and Lagrange (§ 2). 
Grtlneiflen's Views (f 3). 
Views of Baentsch (§ 4). 

Expressions of grief among the Hebrews varied 

with the occasion. Childless Rachel grieved through 

envy (Gen. xxx. 1). Examples appear of the grief 

of the vanquished (I Kings xx. 31; 

I. Signs of Jer. xllx. 3) ; of the destitute (Jer. 

Moumiiig. xvi. 5); of those imder the wrath of 
God (Amos viii. 8); of those in trouble 
(Isa. bd. 3) ; of those who receive evil tidings (Num. 
xiv. 39). Such grief shows itself by outward mani- 
festations, the most striking of which are seen in 
the case of death and bereavement. Grief makes a 
man fall to the ground (II Sam. xii. 20) ; cover his 
face (II Sam. xix. 4); neglect his person (II Sam. 
xii. 20); seek solitude in the upper chamber 
(II Sam. xviii. 33) or on the very roof (Isa. xv. 3); 
while the weeping mourners assemble in the street 

(Isa. XV. 3) or in the house of mourning (Matt. ix. 
23). They have their heads shorn to bsddness (Jer. 
xlviii. 37). The law, however, forbade this practise 
as heathenish (Deut. xiv. 1), but the Moabites ob- 
served it (Isa. XV. 2). Mourners even tore out their 
hair by the roots (Ezra ix. 3), sat in ashes (Jonah 
iii. 6), and put earth on their heads (I Sam. iv. 12). 
The wringing of the hands (Lam. i. 17) and the 
beating of the breast (Isa. xxxii. 12) are also signs 
of grief. The signs of mourning were carried also 
in the clothing. The mourner put off his adorn- 
ment (Ex. xxxiii. 4), went barefoot (II Sam. xv. 
30), rent his clothing (not so the high priest, how- 
ever, Lev. xxi. 10), and assumed special signs of 
mourning such as sackcloth (Heb. sak, cf. Dress 
AND Ornament, Hebrew, § 1; and II Sam. xxi. 
10; Isa. 1. 3 ; Joel i. 8), or raiment of dark color 
(Mai. iii. 14, A. V. margin). He also fasted (Dan. 
X. 3) even for seven days (I Sam. xxxi. 13). The 
neighbors would offer food to the mourner (II Sam. 
xii. 16-17), which may have been a specific ** bread 
of mourners," baked of coarse meal (Hos. ix. 4). 
An important part was played in the mourning for 
the dead by the dirge or elegy, the most notable 
instances of which are David's lament over Jona- 
than (II Sam. i. 17 sqq.), and Jeremiah's over 
Josiah (II Chron. xxxv. 25). This was later ac- 
companied with musical instruments (Matt. ix. 
23). While such lamentations, like the fast men- 
tioned (I Sam. xxxi. 13), usually lasted for seven 
days, Aaron and Moses were mourned for thirty 
days (Num. xx. 29). The anniversary of a death 
was also celebrated (Judges xi. 40) for four days. 
The Law forbade mourning celebrations over the 
criminal, the suicide, or the outlaw. 

Modem critics have sometimes traced the mourn- 
ing customs of the Hebrews to a natm*al religion 
which existed previously to the Mosaic 
3. Explana- dispensation and an animistic belief 
tions of which was independent of the divine 

Sohwally, revelation of the Hebrew Bible (cf. F. 

Frey, and Schwally, Das Leben nach dem Tode, 

Lagrange. Giessen, 1892). Tonsure of the head 
and cutting off of the beard were by 
Schwally considered to be offerings of the hair; 
tearing or gashing of the flesh was a blood offering 
for the dead. Sackcloth was originally the cloth- 
ing of slaves, and the wearing of it was a token of 
submission to the dead, who still had power to help 
or hurt the living. To win the favor of the dead 
the mourner ate with him the bread of mourning, 
and drank with him the cup of sorrow. The treas- 
ures laid in the graves of kings, as Josephus relates, 
were so many offerings to the dead. On the con- 
trary J. Frey and Lagrange rightly maintain that 
all these mourning rites are celebrated as imder the 
eye of Yahweh, who is, as it were, brought nearer 
to the mourners by the death of those they love or 
honor. Sackcloth is the religious materiid indica- 
tive of humiliation. The veiling of the head, or the 
hiding of the face with the hands is a sign of shrink- 
ing awe in the presence of Yahweh (Ex. iii. 6; 
I Kings xix. 13). The wearing of mourning gar- 
ments was intended to call down the mercy and 
tenderness of God. The bread of mourning and 
the cup of sorrow were not meant to propitiate the 

Koaminff Onstoms 
lEoTexnent, JLayman's 



dead. For whatever elements of religious observ- 
ance the Israelites derived from the non-Hebraic 
nations they at once incorporated in their worship 
of Yahweh, at least up to the times of Amos, Hosea, 
and Jeroboam II. This is apparent from Jer. xli. 
5. Later legislation did not forbid such mourning 
observances except so far as they were heathenish 
and ignored Yahwch. That the cutting of the hair 
was not a substitute for a human sacrifice but was 
merely intended to be a disfigurement of the mourner 
is proved by the fact that the Egyptians usually 
had their heads shaven, but in time of sorrow al- 
lowed their hair to grow. Frey looks upon all these 
mourning customs as so many signs of self-humilia- 
tion before the sender of so great a calamity, and 
of a desire to form some sort of connection or re- 
lation with the soul who has vanished into the land 
of shadows. 

Griineisen rightly takes the position that Frey's 
interpretation is one-sided. In the time of affliction 

men are suddenly made conscious, he 

3. Grttnei- says, of the nearness of God, who has 

sen's Views, in his hand the power of death. They 

seem to be brought in peril of death. 
They disguise themselves in sackcloth and disfigure 
themselves in various ways so as to conceal their 
identity from God and escape this peril. They 
would also conceal themselves from the spirit of 
the dead, for the dread of ghosts is universal. The 
spirit of the dead is looked upon by them as no su- 
perhuman being, worthy of worship, but as a gloomy 
specter less than human. The disfigurement is in- 
tended to make the living unrecognizable by the 
spirits of the dead, and the dirge or elegy is merely 
a means of driving them away. Lagrange, on the 
contrary, thinks that there is nothing mysterious 
or animistic to be found in most of these mourning 
customs. To weep, to cry aloud, to sigh, to kiss 
the dead are merely signs of natural sorrow. La- 
grange also gives a plausible explanation of the cus- 
tom of sitting in ashes. Ashes are a sign of deso- 
lation. When a city has been sacked, ruined, and 
burnt, the hillocks and mounds that remain are the 
sole refuge of the inhabitants. They sit in the dust 
(Isa. xlvii. 1) or in the ashes (Jonah iii. 6), wallow 
in ashes (Jer. vi. 2G; Mic. i. 10), and cast up dust 
on their heads (Ezek. xxvii. 30). In all these usages 
are symbolized the ashes of the tomb or of the 
corpse consumed on a funeral pyre. 

AH these expositions seem to fail in breadth and 
comprehensiveness. Baentsch, however, seems to 
have pointed out the only way to a profitable han- 
dling of such questions. From a wide acquaintance 

with ancient oriental thought he has 

4. Views come to the conclusion that the Hc- 

of Baentsch.brew Scriptures are to be accepted as 

authentic, but with due regard to the 
results of modern criticism. They are to be inter- 
preted on a broader basis. Accordingly all the 
mourning customs of the Hebrews are to be taken 
as part and parcel of the universal tradition of the 
ancient oriental peoples. It is evident that all 
Semitic peoples, whether Babylonian, Arabian, 
Syrian, or Canaanitc, had similar conceptions of the 
soul of the dead wandering about as a shade. Death 
was a misfortune which men sought to avoid. These 

two ideas took various forms. Some peoples thought 
that the soul could be conjured back to earth; 
others that it wandered without rest in the under 
world until it obtained relief. It was in man's 
power to protect himself from the spirit and to pro- 
cure rest for it. But such beliefs by no means im- 
ply worship of the dead. It is now known from 
many sources that these ancient oriental ideas were 
deeply rooted in the mind of Israel, though op- 
posed to the religion of Yahweh. This religion was 
forced to apply in a new sense the words expressive 
of the old terms of ancient astral religion w^hich 
alone were intelligible to the people. Thus there 
flowed an upper and an under current of religious 
life in Israel. The greater number of the mourning 
customs originated in the under stream, therefore 
the people tenaciously adhered to them. There 
are scholars who maintain that the under stream 
is the direct outcome of the religion of Yahweh, 
except in cases where they find a Semitic parallel 
usage of higher antiquity. But the main object of 
this religion was to teach the people monotheism, 
though it made itself felt in every department of 
human life. But there did not cease to be some 
subjects on which the religion of Israel never 
mounted much above the level of the ancient orien- 
tal speculations, and these subjects were death, 
the grave, the soul, mourning, and Sheol. But to 
declare that every detail in the beliefs held on such 
subjects continued to conform to ancient oriental 
systems would not express the truth, for such ideas 
in many instances had become completely trans- 
formed by the influence of the reUgion of Yahweh. 
See Burial; Cemeteries. (R. Zehnffund.) 

Bibliography: Early investii^tionfl which have still very 
considerable value are collected in Ugolini, Theaaunu, 
vol. xxxiii. Kecent discussions^ besides the book of 
Schwally mentioned in the text, are: J. Frey. Die oUiMraelr- 
Uischa Totentrauer, Dorpat, 1804; idem. Tod, Seelen- 
glanbe und SetUnkuU im alien Israel^ Leipsic, 1898; Jas- 
trow, in JAOS, xx (1899), 130-150; idem, in ZATW, 
xxii (1902). 117-120; C. GrOneisen. Der AhnenkuUtu und 
die Urreligion laraeU, Halle. 1900; BQchler, in ZATW, 
xxi (1901), 81-92; M. Klota, Krankenbeauch und Trauer- 
brauch nach Bibel und Talmud, Frankfort, 1901; M. J. 
Lagrange, Etudes »ur lea nligiona aSmitiquea, Paris, 1903; 
B. Baentsch, AUorientaliacher und iaraelitiacher Monotheia- 
miM, Tabingen. 1906; Wellhausen, Heidentum, pp. 177 
sqq.; Benasinger. ArcKOologie, pp. 163 sqq.; Nowack, 
Archnolooie, i. 193 sqq.; DB. iii. 453-455; EB, iii. 3220- 
3222; DCG, ii. 208-209. 496; JE, ix. 101-102. 

Illustrative matter is found in: I. Goldxiher, Le Sacri- 
fice de la chevelure, Paris, 1881; J. Lippert, Der SeelenkuU 
in aeinen Beziehungen zur althebrdiachen Religion, Berlin, 
1881; A. Jeremias, HoUe und Paradiee bei den Babylo- 
niem, Leipsic, 1903; idem, Daa aUe Testament im Lichte 
des alien Orient, ib. 1907; A. Bertholet, Die leraeliHeehe 
Voralellungen vom Zuatand nach dem Tode, Tubingen, 
1899; 8. I. Curtiss, Primitive Semitic Religion Today, 
New York, 1902; P. D. Chantepie de la Saussaye, Re- 
ligionsgeachichte, i. 328 sqq.. Ttibingen, 1905. 

MOUSE, THE: An animal mentioned in Scrip- 
ture only in Lev. xi. 29; I Sam. vi. 4, 5, 11, 18; 
and Isa. Ixvi. 17. The Hebrew is ^akfUxir, a word 
which probably covers not only the several species 
of mice found in Palestine, but also rats and the 
jerboa or leaping mouse, a marsupial. H. B. Tris- 
tram (Fauna and Flora of Palestine^ pp. 122 sqq., 
London, 188-1) suspects that the word does duty 
for twenty- three kinds of small rodents. Though 
this extended use can not be absolutely proved for 



Mourning' Cnstoms 
Movement, Laymen's 

the Old Testament, it is rendered nearly certain by 
the usage €i the Talmud and that in cognate lan- 

While the mention in Scripture is rare, in two 
cases the circumstances are of unusual interest. 
The passage in Leviticus is of less importance, as it 
simply registers the mouse among the animals over 
which a food taboo extends. The chapter in I Sam- 
ud deals with the plague on the Philistines (q.v.) 
attending the presence among them of the ark, and 
a significant part of the history is existence among 
the prc^itiatory offerings of golden mice (rats?) 
which the sufferers evidently associated with the 
pestilence. The connection of the rat with the bu- 
bonic plague so recently discovered illumines this 
narrative (see Diseases and the Healing Art, 
f 4). Indirectly confirmatoiy of this is the disaster 
referred to in II Kings ix. 35, by which the great 
anny of Sennacherib was almost wholly destroyed 
on the borders of Egypt. The Egyptian account 
introduces the mouse, though in a different way 
(see Assyria, YI., 3, 12), and the real cause of the 
catastrophe to the Assyrians may well have been 
the bubonic plague. 

The passage in Isa. Ixvi. 17 is even more striking, 
referring as it does to the eating of the mouse in 
connection with the eating of the swine " and the 
abomination." The explanation here is doubtless 
to be found in the mystic sacrificial eating of a 
totem animal (see Comparative Religion, VI., 
1, d. { 1). The evidence that the mouse was once 
a totem animal is quite convincing. This animal 
was in the Troad held sacred to Apollo, was fed in 
his temple, and images of it were also kept there 
(Aelian, Historian xii. 5), sometimes appearing be- 
side the deity's tripod and sometimes beneath his 
feet. In the r^on the name for the mouse was 
sminthos, and one of the epithets of Apollo was 
Smintheus (e.g., Riad, i. 39), the phrase " Sminthean 
Apollo " was equivalent to ** Apollo of the mouse *' 
(df. Strabo, Oeigraphica, xiii. 604), and Sminthiac 
feasts were celebrated at Rhodes, Gela, Lesbos, and 
in Crete. In the Troad a number of places were 
named from the mouse, in C!!eos and Tenedos there 
were Sminthean temples, and the animal appears 
on coins and heraldic designs (Strabo, x. 486). The 
connection of the deity with the animal is explained 
in a twofold manner quite in accordance with the 
method accompanying the vestiges of totemistic 
practiaes— Apollo was the protector and also the 
destroyer of the mouse. Both explanations may 
have a historical basis. The immunity offered a 
totem animal sometimes results in the animal be- 
coming a pest; the removal of the nuisance by any 
means is then ascribed to the god who formerly 
protected it and his relation to it is reversed in the 
myth. It is known also that in Egypt the rat was 
a totem animxil sacred to Ra (J. G. Wilkinson, Man- 
ners ami Customs f new ed., London, 1883), while the 
inhiibitan ts of Crocodilopolis worshiped the shrew- 
mouse, which was sacred to Horus, and examples 
of porcelain models of the animal are extant. In 
^ndia the mouse was sacred to Rudra and to Gan- 
fsha, and the image of the latter often has a mouse 
under its foot. If Isa. Ixvi. be as late as the moder- 
ate critics place it (in the Greek period), it was com- 

posed in a time when religious syncretism was en- 
tering Palestine in force, and with the evidences of 
mouse worship about — ^in the Mediterranean basin, 
in Egypt, and in Crete — the reference is best ex- 
plained as a totemistic observance adopted by rene- 
gade Jews and denounced by the prophet. A like 
reference is probably to be seen in Ezck. viii. 10. 

Geo. W. Gilmohe. 

Bibliography: Besides the commentaries on the passages, 
consult: Smith, Semites, 2d ed., p. 293; A. Lang. Custom 
and Myth, pp. 103-120, London, 1885; idem. Myth, Rit- 
ual, and Reiigion, p. 201. ib. 1887; idem. Modem Mythol- 
ogy, pp. 80-82, ib. 1897: J. G. Fra«er. Golden Bough, ii. 
129-132, London, 1890. Material illustrative but not 
closely pertinent may be found in J. Hastings, Encyclo- 
pasdia of Religion and Ethics, i. 523, Edinburgh and New 
York. 1908. 


movement organized in the chapel of the Fifth 
Avenue Presbyterian Church, New York City, Nov. 
15, 1906, at a layman's meeting held in connection 
with the celebration of the one hundredth anniver- 
sary of the " Haystack prayer-meeting " (see Mili^, 
Samuel John) out of which grew the American 
Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (see 
CoNGREGATiONALisTS, I., 4, § 11). Only about 
seventy-five laymen were present at the initial 
meeting. From three to six in the afternoon, a 
large part of the time was spent in prayer. During 
the evening session, one address was given, followed 
by discussion concerning the necessity of enlisting 
the laymen of all the churches more fully in the 
work of foreign missions. A scries of resolutions 
was passed, calling into existence a conmaittee of 
twenty-five or more representative laymen, to con- 
sult with the secretaries of the various foreign mis- 
sionary boards, with reference, first, to the conduct 
of a campaign of education among laymen, to in- 
terest them more largely in missions; second, to 
the devising of a comprehensive plan for the evan- 
gelization of the world in this generation; third, to 
endeavor to send a commission of fifty or more lay- 
men to visit the mission fields and report their 
findings to the Church at home. The chairman of 
this committee, Samuel B. Capen of Boston, pre- 
sented these proposals on behalf of the committee 
to the annual conference of foreign mission boards 
of the United States and Canada at Pliiladelphia, 
Jan. 9, 1907. The movement was heartily and 
unanimously endorsed by this conference, including 
all Protestant churches in North America. In the 
formal resolutions of the conference these para- 
graphs occur: *' We recognize this movement as 
providential, having been bom of prayer and of the 
Spirit. In its spontaneity and timeliness it gives 
evidence of the hand of God, and we are profoundly 
convinced that this is but another step in advance 
toward the completion of his great purpose in the 
redemption of mankind. . . . We recognize the 
imperative necessity for this new movement, in 
view of the tremendous demands of a world field 
white for the harvest, which requires that the 
churches of Christendom should lay plans and put 
forth effort adequate to meet the demands that are 
upon us." 

The plan of the movement is not to send out mis- 
sionaries nor to administer missionary funds, but 

Havomant, Idtyman'* 


only to cooperate in the enlargement of the foreign 
misaionary worlt carried on by the various churches 
through their own regular agencies. 

Jn the Bummer o( 1907, at the invitation of lead- 
-ers of miHsionaiy work in Great Britain, a conunis- 
aion of sis laymen from the United States and 
Cnnada visited London, Edinburgh, Liverpool, and 
other cities in England and Scotland, presenting the 
methods and plana of the Laymen 'a Missionary 
Hovcinent. Coramitteea were appointed both in 
Er^land and Scotland to extend the work. The 
Scottish national committee employs a secretary to 
(lcvol« hia time to the movement. In 11K)7-0S, 
over sixty laymen visited various mission fields to 
investigate religious conditions, needs, and results. 
Since their return, many of them have been en- 
gaged largely in giving their testimony t« the 
churches and have been successful in stimulating 
greatly increased interest in missionary work. 
During the winter of 1908-09 a national missionaiy 
campaign was conducted by the Laymen's Mission- 
ary Movement in Canada, conventions being held in 
a large number of the leading cities of the Domin- 
ion. Un Mar. 31 to Apr. 4, 1!K>9, there was held in 
Toronto a Canadian missionary congress, attended 
by over 4,000 commissioners, representing all Prot^ 
estant churches. This congress adopted a notable 
national misaionary policy, the first of its kind ever 
adopted by the representatives of all the churches 
of a nation. It has since been ratified by all the 
ohurcb courts of the various communions in Canada. 
The complete proceedings of the congress have been 
published in Canaila's MUmonary Congress (Toronto, 
loot)). A Canudian council has direct supervision 
of the work in Canada. 

A similar national missionary campaign was con- 
ducted throughout the United States during the 
winter of 1(K)!I-10, including conventions at seventy- 
five of the leading cities, culminating in a national 
misHionary congress at Chicago, May .'J-6, lltlO. 
Twelve of the denominations in the llnited States 
and Cann<ia have organised their own denomina- 
tional committees of the Laymen's Minsionary 
Movement, to promote its spirit and methods more 
thorougiily in their own communions. About 
twenty Becretaries are now employed by different 
commitljies to give their whole time to the super- 
vision and extension of the movement. It is worthy 
of note that the offerings to foreign missions by 
the churches of the United States and Canada in- 
creased during the fiscal year 1007-08 by $t)02,000 
over the contributions of the previous year. The 
gain in the fiscal year 1908-09 over the previous 
year was »l,26a,000. 

The Laymen's Missionary Movement has no mem- 
bership and no organization, apart from a series of 
committees. There is a general committee of over 
IfK) laymen, which meets semiannually, giving 
general direction to the movement. There is an 
executive committee of twenty-one members, which 
meets each month in New York City, gi\'iiig closer 
fluperviaion to the work. The chief executive offi- 
cer is the general secretary, J. Campbell While, who 
was called to this office soon after the movement 
began and has contiimcd in this position ever since. 
The offices arc in the Mctrqiolitan Building, 1 Mad- 

ison Avenue, New York City. The chief features 
of a standard missionary church, as emphasiied by 
the Laymen's Misaionary Movement, are as follows: 

(1) a misaionary pastor; 

(2) a missionary committee; 

(3) systematic missionary education, through 
regular meetings, 

literature, and 

(4) canvass of entire membership for subscrip- 

(5) a weekly missionary offering; 

(6) all plans, prayers, efforts, and offerings are 

related to the world as a field. 
By these methods whole cities have more than 
doubled their entire previous missionary offerings 
and at least one whole denomination has experi' 
enced a similar result. It is the hope and purpose 
of the movement to enlist the men of all churchea 
in the steady support of a missionaiy policy, ade- 
(juate to the presentation of the Gospel of Christ to 
every creature. J. Campbell. Wuitb. 

alist; b. at Markham. Ontario, Aug. 10, 1848. 
After serving in the northern army throughout 
the Civil War, he was educated at Kalamasoo 
College, Mich. (1866-G8), Shurtleff College, lU. 
(1868-70), the University of Rochester (A.B., 187»), 
and Rochester Theological Seminary (187S). He 
was ordained ia the Baptist ministiy in 1871 and 
from 1872 ixt 1875 was pastor of the Baptist chureh 
at Albion, Mich. He was then pastor at Mt. 
Morris, N. Y., and at the same time pursued his 
theological studies at Rochester, until 1S7S, after 
which he held successive pastorates at the First 
Baptist Church, Cleveland, O. (1879-85), and the 
First Baptist Church, Boston (188.')-03), and rince 
IS'.M has been pastor of the South Congregational 
Church, Springfield, Maas. He was university 
preacher at Harvard in 18!M-i)7 and Lowell lec- 
turer in 1895. He has written The Aim of Life 
(Boston, 1894); From Jerusalem to Nicaa: The 
Church in the First Three Centuries (1895); and 
The Religion of Hope ( 1 896) . 

HOYER LECTURE; A lectureship founded by 
Lady Rebecca Moyer (widow of Sir Samuel Moyer; 
d, in London about 1722). The amount left was 
twenty pounds annually, chargeable against her 
house in Bedford Row, London; the sermons, eight 
in number, were to be delivered annually in St. 
Paul's, London, if permitted, on the first Thursday 
of each month from November to June, and were 
to defend the divinity of Christ and the doctrine 
of the Trinity, The lectureship terminated about 
1774 by reason of expiration of the lease of the 
house. A list of the lectures ia given in J. Darling, 
Cyelopirdia BiUiograpkica, cols. 2129-2130, London, 

MOZAHABIC LITURGY: .\n ancient Spanish 
liturgj'i called also Gothic because it developed 
during the Gothic dominion in Spain, The name 
" Mozurabic," from a participial form of the Arabic 
verb 'Aralia and signifying "arabized," came Into 
use in the eighth century as a general designation 
for the Christians who remained in Spain after 



Movement, Laymen's 

the Mohammedan conquest. Opinions have dif- 
fered as to the origin of the Spanish liturgy. In 
view of its marked diveigence from the Roman 
ritual and its great resemblance to the Gallican, 
some have thought that the Spanish and Gallican 
liturgies both developed from the Asiatic (Lesley, 
Mabillon, Bickell, and others) and that the former 
was substantially the same as that brought into 
the country by the Goths. Others (Gams, Probst, 
Pinius) maintain that the oldest Spanish liturgy 
was the Roman and that the Gothic importation 
was influenced by it and worked over especially 
by Bishops Leander and Isidore of Seville. The 
question is solved if it be admitted that originally 
Rome had the same liturgy as the East (see Mass, 
n, 2, { 1). In the latter half of the eleventh cen- 
tuiy under Popes Alexander II. and Gregory VII. 
efforts were made to introduce the Roman ritual. 
In 1088 a synodal decree ordered the suppression 
d the Mosarabic Liturgy in Toledo, and when oppo- 
sition arose the decision, according to the custom 
of the time, was left to the ordeal (the two liturgies 
being exposed to fire); the Mozarabic rite coming 
through unscathed was regarded as having vin- 
dicated its right to exist. King Alfonso VI. de- 
termined to allow both liturgies side by side. At 
the end of the sixteenth century the Mozarabic 
rite had been supplanted everywhere except in 
ax churches in Toledo. Cardinal Ximenes exerted 
himself to preserve it and had prepared new and 
careful editions of both the missal and breviary 
(published at Toledo 1500 and 1502); he also 
obtained papal permission for the six churches in 
Toledo to use the lituigy and built a chapel which 
he provided with a foundation for thirteen chap- 
lains who should perform the office and mass daily 
according to the liturgy. Similar foundations 
were made in Salamanca and Valladolid (see Mass, 
n, 3, i 1, and cf. J. Pmiusin ASB, July, vi., 66-67; 
C. J. Heifele,, Cardinal Ximenes, Tubingen, 1844, 
pp. 161 sqq.). 

The order of festivals in the Mozarabic liturgy 
differs somewhat from that in the Roman; e.g., 
there are six Sundays in Advent and two festivals 
of the Annimciation (Mar. 24 and Dec. 18). The 
three lections (prophecy, epistle, gospel) are re- 
tained, and prominence is given to homiletical 
matter. After each of the readings there is a short 
discourse to the people, in which the hortatory 
element predominates. Certain usages, as the 
breaking of the host into nine parts, each of which 
has a special name and meaning, are reminiscent 
of the Greek Ch\m;h. The chant is more melodious 
than the Gregorian; it is named " Eugenian '' from 
a certain Eugenius, archbishop of Toledo. 

The Mozarabic ma» begins with the prayer of the prient 
M be ascends the altar^teps. Then follow the introit, the 
Gloria in excelsifl (but not alwajra), the prayer of the day, 
the prophecy, the psallendum (gradual), the epistle, and the 
icospel. After this comes the preparation and presentation of 
the offerings, which are not yet regarded as a proper sacri- 
fice and which the catechumens were allowed to see. The 
of'ier of the mass of the faithful u as follows: a prayer 
railed mism, which varies according to time and festival; 
another prayer, the commemoration of saints and the dead; 
the aratio po9t nomina, the oraHo ad pacem, with the kiss of 
peace: the preface under the name tttotio. ending with the 
TiBigioD; the pn^yer poat mxnctut: the consecration and 

elevation and, during the latter, the post pridie, a prayer 
not unlike the final prayer of the Roman canon; the cr^ed, 
the breaking of the bread into nine parts, of which each re- 
ed vea the name of a mystery of the faith; memento of the 
living, especially of those present; the Lord's prayer; mix- 
ing of the nine fragments with the holy blood; blessing of 
the people; communion, with music and prayer, thanks- 
giving; dismissal and solemn blessing with the words in 
unitaie SancU Spiriius benedicat vos Pater et Filiua, amen, 

Bibuoobapht: Editions are: by A. OrtuB at the instance of 
Cardinal Ximenes. missal, Toledo, 1500, breviary, 1502; 
in H. Flores, Eapafla sagrada, vol. iii., Madrid, 17-18; by 
A. Lesley, Rome, 1755; the missal by F. A. Lorenzana 
and F. Fabian y Fuero, Angclopolis, 1770, and the brevi- 
ary by Lorenzana, Madrid, 1775; by F. Arevalus, Rome, 
1804; Lesley*!! ed. of the missal with his preface and 
Lorenxana's, in Af PL, Ixxxv., and Lorenzana's ed. of the 
breviary, ib. Ixxxvi.; another ed., Toledo, 1873; Liber 
comicua, ed. Q. Morin. in Anecdota Mcredsolana^ i (1893), 

Consult: F. Probst, in ZHT, 1888, pp. 1 sqq.; idem. 
Die abendJUindiache Meaae vom 6-8 Jahrhunderte, pp. 367 
sqq., Mtinster, 1896; J. Pinius, in .45^, July, vi. 1-112, 
idem, LUiargia Mozarabicat Rome, 1740; J. M. Neale; 
Tetralooia liturgica, London, 1849; idem, Eaaaya in Litur- 
giology and Church Hist., ib. 1863; C. R. Hale. The Mot- 
arabic Liturgy and the Mexican Branch of the Catholic 
Church, New York, 1876; idem, Mozarabic CoUeeta, ib. 
1881; G. RietAchel, L4turffik, i. 316 sqq., Berlin, 1900; E. 
J. y Moraleda, El Rito Mozdrabe, Toledo, 1904. 


MOZETTA. See Vestments and Insignia, 

land theologian; b. at Gainsborough (15 m. n.w. 
of Lincoln), England, Sept. 15, 1813; d. at Oxford 
Jan. 4, 1878. He studied at Grantham, and subse- 
quently at Oriel College, Oxford (A.B., 1834; M.A., 
1838; B.D., 1846; D.D., 1871); was elected to a 
fellowship at Magdalen College in 1840, where he 
resided until 1856, when he accepted the living of 
Old Shoreham, Sussex. Through Mr. Gladstone 
he was made canon of Worcester in 1869; and, in 
1871, regius professor of divinity, an office which 
he held, in conjunction with his vicarage, until 
his death. He was appointed Hampton lecturer 
for 1865, and select university preacher in 1869. 
While Mozley was a student at Oxford, the influ- 
ence of Newman and Pusey was strong, and he was 
an enthusiastic though independent follower of 
those early leaders in the Tractarian movement. 
Yet when Newman entered the Church of Rome, 
Mozley kept firm in his allegiance to the Anglican 
Church. Thus he found himself separated from 
the party with which he had been originally iden- 
tified. Agreeing with the predestinarianism of 
St. Augustine, and at odds with the doctrine of 
his party, he labored to reconcile the Christian 
tradition about baptism with the theology of Cal- 
vinism. Accordingly he stood almost quite alone 
as a theologian; he never quite sympathized with 
the Evangelicals in their general spirit and tone, 
and he never ceased to be a Churchman, and in 
fact a High-churchman; but the developments of 
that party were not to his taste and he found no 
other that he could join. Mozley was at his best 
in argument, and may indeed be called the "Butler 
of his generation." He was also recognized as 
one of the best theological thinkers of his day, and 
his sermons were of a superior quality. For a 
long period he was known only as a contributor 


to The Critic and The Christian Remendyramxr , 
while his writings in general covered subjects 
critical, dogmatic, and tipologetic. His produc- 
tions embrace: The Injluence of Ancient Oraelea 
in Public and Private Life {vol. v. ot Oxford English 
Priie Estayi, Oxford, 1836); A Treatise on the 
Auguttinian Doctrine of Predealination (London, 
1855); The Primitive Doctrine of Baptisnud Re- 
generation (1856); A Remeio of the Baptismal Con- 
troversy {18G2); Eight Lectures on Mirades Preached 
before the Univergity of Oxford in . . . 18GS (Bamp- 
ton lectures, 1865; loteat ed., 1805); Sermons 
Preached before the Vniversity of Oxford, and on 
Various Occasions (Oxford and Cambridge, 1876; 
latest ed,, 1895); Ruling Ideas m Early Ages and 
their Relation to Old Testament Faith; Lectures 
(London. 1877; latest ed-. New York, 1908); 
Essays, Historical and Theological (2 vols., 1878); 
The Theory of Development. A CrUiciam of Dr. 
Newman's Essay on the Development of Christian 
Doctrine (1878); Sermons, Parochial nnil Occasiorud 
(1879); and Lectures and Other Theological Papers 
(1883; reissue, 1907). 

Bibuoqhapht: Th, r,rttrr, of J. B. Moiln,. ■ ■ . HilU'd 
ba hit Sitter [Aone Moilfy], lAodan. 1HR4^ the InUudua- 
tlDD Id tile Etrayt. ulsu|i.. by binaiiler, nnd a tgiograpliirnl 
Botiee by R. W. Church, in theaooiei R. W. Chunb. The 
Oxford Movement, Loodon, IBOl: DNB, xxxii. 'it^'ibl. 


Genoan Lutheran; b. at Dresden June 20, 183!). 
He waa educated at the universities of Leipsic 
and Eriangen from 1857 to 1862 (Ph.D., Leipsic, 
1861), and in 1869 became privat-doccnt for Old- 
Teatament exegesis at the former univeraity. In 
the following year he was called to Dorpiit as pro- 
fessor of the same subject, remaining there until 
1895, when he became professor of New-Testa- 
ment exegesis at the University of Kiel, resigning 
in 1909. He has edited J. F. Btittcher's Neue eie- 
getisch-kritiache AehrenUse mm Alien Testament (3 
TFola., Lcipsic, 18a^-65) and Ausfahrliches Lehrbuch 
d-iT hebrSischen Sprache (2 vols., 1866-68); Lifer 
Genesis sine imnctis excriptus (in collaboration with 
E. F. Kautuscb; 1868); and the eighth to the elev- 
enth editions of W. Gesenius's llebrdischea und 
eheUddischet Handwdrterbuch (in collaboration with 
W. Volck, 1878-90); and has written De proverbi- 
oram qua dicunlur A^uri el Lemuelis origine et 
indole (Lelpeic, 1869); Die biblische Lehre vom 
Cemssen (Dorpat, 1889); Zur paulinisehen Elkik 
(Kiel, 1898); Martinus Seuteniui' Reiscins heUige 
Land (1902); and Die Osteeeprovinsen Russlands 
und Hire deuttche KuUur (1906). 

CHIOR: The patriarch of the Lutheran Church in 
North America; b, at Eimbeck (39 m. s.e. of 
Banover, Germany) Sept. 6, 1711; d. at New Provi- 
dence (Trappe), Pa., Oct. 7, 1787. In the Latin 
echool of his native tottTi the foundation was loid 
for his excellent closaicat training. From 1735 to 
1738 he studied theology at Gtittingeti, and then 
served as teacher in the Francke institutions at 
Halle. Having been ordained at, Leip'^ic in 1739 
he was called to GrosBhennersdorf through the in- 
fluence of Baroness von Gcrsdorf, the patroness of 
that charge. In the year 1741 August Hermann 

Francke (q.v.) urged him to accept a call from the 
three Lutheran congr^ations in Pennsylvania 
(New Providence, New Hanover, and Philadel' 
phia), which had been transmitted by the Rev. 
Fiedriech Michael Zlegenhagea in London. In 
April, 1742, he arrived in Ixindon and in June of 
the same year embarked for Geoigia, where he was 
to visit the Salzburg colonista under pastors Bol- 
ziua and Gronau, near Savannah. He arrived in 
Philadelphia, Nov. 25, 1742. 

At the time of his entrance into the new worid 
Muehlenberg was in the prime of his young man- 
hood. Having enjoyed a fine classical education 
he spoke Latin fluently. He n'as also able to use 
the Dulcb and EngUrfi tongues ia preaching, be- 
sides bia native German. He waa a scholariy 
theologian, firmly rooted in the Lutheran Confe^on. 
The alight touch ot Halle Pietism which he hud 
received proved a wholesome feature in his pastoral 
dealings with individuals. He was dignified and 
magnetic in his personal appearance, well balanced 
in his judgment of men and aCFairs, pleasant and 
cordial in Ills intercourse with men of high or low 
degree, and gifted with remarkable powers ot or- 
ganization and administration. Thus be was 
particularly well equipped for bringing order into 
the chaotic condition of the scattered Lutherans in 
America, and for laying the foundation for a eohd 
organisation. Among the GermaJi emigrants in 
the Province of Pennsylvania up to the middle 
of the eighteenth century the Mennonilea, Scbwenck- 
feldei^, and other sects were strongly repreaonled. 
The German Reformed were also quite numerous. 
But the majority belonged to the Lutheran oon- 
fesaion. Yet there was hardly any provision made 
for their spiritual needs. Men who had never been 
called to the ministry, or who had been disciplined 
and deposed as unworthy of the office in the old 
country, like Valentin Kraft, pressed into the folds 
which were without shepherds and assumed the 
pastoral office. Nearly ten years before Muehlen- 
berg's arrival the above-mentioned Pennsylvania 
congregations had applied to Dra. Ziegenhagen in 
London and Francke in Halle for worthy Lutheran 
pastors. Their patience hod been severely tried 
by tiresome negotiations. Juat one year before 
Mucltlenberg's arrival Nicholas Ludwig Zinxeudorf 
(q.v.) appeared in Pennsylvania under the name of 
Count von Thuemstein and sought to gather around 
his person & sort of union of the best elements of 
German Christians. He proved to be particulariy 
aggresBive toward the Lutherans. In Philadelphia 
Zinxendorf subjected Muehlenberg to an Examen 
rigoTosum, which he endured in a dignified manner. 
Having been required by the mayor of the city 
to give up the church records of the Lutherans, 
Zinxendorf left the city Jan. 1, 1743, and returned 

Now the field was clear for Muehlenberg to take 
up the work of organizing the Lutheran Chureh in 
this western continent, and this proved to be his 
life-work. The service of the three congregations 
which had called him, was very exacting, as they 
were 36 miles distant from each other, without 
roads to connect them. He devoted himself to 
of the young, insisted on scrip- 




tural discipline for the communicants, installed 
elders and deacons, and built school-houses and 
churches. Other congregations also asked for his 
advice and services; for example, the Lutherans 
on the Raritan River, New Jersey; in southwestern 
Pennsylvania (Frederick); and even the churches 
on the upper Hudson, founded by the Palatinate 
immigrants, and the Dutch Lutherans in New York 
whom he served as pastor for two successive sum- 
mers. Thus his influence gradually extended over 
ail the Lutherans in the provinces of North America. 

At his urgent request the fathers in Halle sent 
additional laborers into the American field, Peter 
Bnmnholz, Nicolas Kurtz, Johann Helfrich Schaum, 
Johann Friedrich Handschuh, Johann Friedrich 
Schmidt, Justus Heinrich Christian Helmuth, and 
Johann Christopher Kunze, the most prominent 
and scholarly among them, who afterward became 
Muehlenberg's son-in-law. In 1748, on the occa- 
sion of the dedication of St. Michael's Church in 
Philadelphia, Muehlenberg organized the first 
Lutheran synod on this western continent, the 
ministerium of Pennsylvania. The Swedish Luth- 
erans in Pennsylvania and Delaware were in full 
sympathy with him in his labors, Provost Johann 
Sandin taking part in the opening of the synod 
and Provost Magnus Wrangel de Saga being his 
intimate friend and safe counselor in all impor- 
tant church questions. In 1761 Muehlenberg took 
up his residence in Philadelphia and prepared the 
first draft of a constitution for the congregation, 
which was at once signed by 500 heads of families 
and became the model for many Lutheran churches 
in Pennsylvania. In 1766 he undertook the erec- 
tion of the large Zion's Church, at the corner of 
Fourth and Cherry streets, Philadelphia, which 
eould accommodate 2,000 persons and was long 
considered the largest and most beautiful church 
edifice in North America. In this church congress 
held the memorial service for Washington in 1799. 
In 1776 Muehlenberg returned again to Providence, 
but his resignation from the Philadelphia congre- 
gation was accepted only in 1779. From Aug., 
1774, to Feb., 1775, he had undertaken another 
journey to the South, in order to settle certain 
difficulties which had ari3en among the Salzburg 
colonists in Georgia. There he succeeded in es- 
tablishing peace between the contending parties 
and prevailed on the congregation to adopt a 
constitution prepared by himself. The last decade 
of his life was spent among his country congrega- 
tions, which he continued to serve with the Word 
and sacraments as far as his failing strength would 
allow. In those years he prepared the draft of 
the first Pennsylvania hynm-book (1780) which 
to this day is known as the "Muehlenberg Hymn 
Book." While it showed here and there the influ- 
ences of the Halle Pietism, it was the best Lutheran 
hymn-book in eastern North America until it 
was replaced by the church-book of the General 
Council in 1877. 

Muehlenberg bore the full biu*den of " a church 
in the planting " under the most difficult and dis- 
tressing circumstances. He found among his people 
a state of utter disintegration and demoralization. 
The various elements, coming from different re- 

gions of the fatherland and inclined to abuse their 
unaccustomed liberty, were hard to unite under 
a sound church discipline. And even the oppo- 
sition of worldly-minded pastors, who resisted his 
work of organization at every step, had to be met 
and overcome in all patience and wisdom. His 
own coworkers in the synod not infrequently 
annoyed him by their lack of tact and of pastoral 

He died with the closing stanza of Paul Ger- 
hardt's hymn "Commit thou all thy griefs" on 
his lips. The Philadelphia congregation desired 
to have him buried under the pulpit of Zion's 
Church, but the family decided in favor of the 
churchyard of the Augustus-Church in New Prov- 
idence (Trappe) as the place of his interment. 
His tombstone bears the prophetical inscription 
(which may be translated; "Had he no monu- 
ment, future ages still would know how great a 
man he was ") : 

Qualis et quarUua fuerit, 

Non ignorabunt sine lapide 

Futura scecula. 

Dr. Muehlenberg was married to Anna Weiser, 
the daughter of the famous Conrad Weiser, Jr., 
who, as an Indian commissioner and interpreter, 
held a very prominent position in the provincial 
government. Three of his sons who were educated 
at Halle and were destined to enter the service of 
the Lutheran Church as ministers became quite il- 
lustrious in American history. John Peter Gabriel, 
bom at Trappe, Pa., Oct. 1, 1746, ordained in 1768, 
was pastor in New Jersey and afterward in Wood- 
stock, Va. In Jan., 1776, he exchanged the minis- 
terial gown for a colonel's uniform, and, at the 
head of his regiment, took part in the war against 
England. He became a general in the American 
army and enjoyed the intimate friendship of Wash- 
ington. After the war he was vice-governor of 
Pennsylvania, member of congress, and senator. 
He died in Philadelphia Oct. 1, 1807. The second 
son, Frederik August Conrad, b. at Trappe, Pa., 
Jan. 1, 1750, ordained 1770, was pastor of Christ 
Church, New York City, and founded the New York 
ministerium of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. 
Afterward he followed a political career, becoming a 
member of congress, speaker of the legislature of 
Pennsylvania, and president of the convention which 
ratifie<l the constitution of the United States. He 
also presided over the first and the third congress 
as speaker. He died in Lancaster June 4, 1801. 
The youngest son, Gotthilf Heinrich Ernst, bom at 
Trappe, Pa., Nov. 17, 1753, is the only one who 
continued in the ministry. He was ordained in 1770, 
assisted his father in the ministry, and became third 
pastor of the Philadelphia congregation. From 
1780 to 1815 he served the Evangelical Lutheran 
Trinity Church in Lancaster, Pa., and died there 
May 23, 1815. He achieved a reputation as a 
scholarly botanist. Adolph Spaeth. 

Biblioorapht: Sources are the HaUesche Nachrichtcnt 2 
vols., Halle, 1750-87t republished with notes by W. J. 
Mann, B. M. Schmucker, and W. Germann, Allentown, 




Pa., vol. i., 1886, Eng. transl., begun by C. W. Schaeffer, 
part i., Reading, Pn., 1882; the Selbstbiographiet going as 
far as 1743. ed. \V. Gemiann, AUentown, Pa., 1881; and 
J. W. Richard's translation of Muehlenberg'a diary, in 
Evangslical Review, vols, i.-iv. Lives are by J. G. C. 
Helmuth. Philadelphia. 1788; M. L. Stoever. ib. 1856; 
W. J. Mann, in English, ib. 1887, in German. 1891; W. K. 
Frick, ib., 1902. Consult further: W. B. Sprague, Annals 
of the American Lutheran Pulpit, New York. 1869; H. E. 
Jacobs, in American Church History Series, vol. iv., chaps, 
xii.-xvlii., ib. 1893; T. E. Schmauk. Hist, of the Lutheran 
Church in Pennsylvania 0638-1820)^ vol. i., Philadelphia, 
1903; and in general literature under Lutherans. 

GUST: German theologian; b. at Kleinkems 
(28 m. 8.W. of Freiburg), Baden, Feb. 26, 1825; d. 
at Wilferdingen (8 m. s.e. of Carlsnihe) Jan. 21, 
1881. He was educated at Heidelberg; became 
vicar at Eppelheim (1847), afterward vicar in 
Carlsnihe, and minister at Sulzfeld (1854). At 
the suggestion of Ullmann, who esteemed him 
highly, he was called to Carlsnihe in 1857 as asses- 
sor of the high consistory. When Ullmann resigned 
in 1860 on account of the controversy over the lit- 
urgy, Miihlhiiusser, who became a regular member 
of the high consistory, remained in that body, but 
openly expressed his divergence from its views. 
In 1864 he frankly opposed it in favor of the pro- 
test signed by 119 clergymen of Baden against 
Schenkel's CharakterhUd Jesu. By degrees his posi- 
tion became untenable, and in this same year he 
accepted a call to the country parish of Wilferdingen. 
There he develof>ed an extensive activity relating to 
ecclesiastical policy. As an acknowledged leader of 
the " positive " party, he assembled his friends in 
the " Evangelical Conference," and represented 
the conservative minority with ability and success 
in many general synods of Baden. As a member of 
the Baden diet he proved an experienced and ready 
parliamentarian. By word and pen he advocated 
the principles of the German Conservatives. After 
1876 he collaborated ynth Geffken in the publica^- 
tion of the Zeiifragen des chritstlichen VolkslebenSf 
the first part of which, Christentum und Presse^ was 
prepared by Mtihlhiiusser himself, and emphasized 
the necessity of defending the Christian view of 
life by means of the press. He was an enthusiastic 
advocate of home missions in south Germany, and 
was for many years the president of the south- 
western conference which he had attended since its 
establishment in 1864. Julius Ney. 

Bibijooraphy: J. Reinrauth. Karl August M Uhlh&usser, 
Heilbronn. 1882. 

MUELLENSIEFEN, mu"len-si'fen, JULIUS: Ger- 
man Lutheran preacher; b. at Iserlohn (45 m. 
n.e. of Cologne), Apr. 28, 1811; d. at Wernigerode 
(22 m. s.s.e. of Brunswick) Apr. 28, 1893. After 
studying at Halle and Berlin, he became private 
tutor in the home of General von Diest; pastor in 
Cothen, Brandenburg, 1836, and in 1852 chief pas- 
tor of the Marienkirche in Berlin, in which position 
he was active for thirty-three years, being made 
pastor emeritus in 1890. Mullensiefen's especial 
gift was the care of souls; he had a peculiarly clear 
insight into the most complicated conditions of the 
inner and outer life and a great faculty of discern- 
ing the possible solution of the problems presented. 
His high ethical standard and the uncompromising 

sternness of his moral judgment were united with a 
paternal sympathy for the needs of a burdened or 
troubled conscience. It was for this reason that he 
exerted a more \iide-spread pastoral influence than 
almost any other cleigyman in Berlin, as well by 
personal communication as through correspondenoe. 
His pastoral and pedagogical gift was unfolded 
more especially in catechetical instruction, to which 
he usually devoted sixteen hours each week during 
the entire year. His sermons also, of which three 
major collections have appeared {Der Weg des Frie- 
dens, Berlin, 1871; Zeugnisse von Chrisio, 4 vols., 
15th ed., Halle, 1894; Das Wort des Lebens, 4 vols., 
8th ed., 1888) bear the same pastoral character. 
The most widely read are Tdgliche Andachten atr 
h&uslichen Erbauung (19th ed., 1905). 

Biblioqraprt: P. MQUenmefen, in Deutsche evangeUadu 
Blatter, xix (1894). 158 sqq. 

trian Jewish Orientalist; b. at Bucsacs (85 m. s.e. 
of Lemberg), Galicia, July 6, 1846. He was edu- 
cated at the universities of Vienna, Leipsic, Stras- 
burg, and Berlin, and in 1875 became privat-doccnt 
at the first-named institution, becoming associate 
professor of Oriental languages in 1881 and full pro- 
fessor in 1885. He is also professor of Hebrew and 
the philosophy of religion at the Vienna Laraelitisch- 
theologische Lehranstalt. He is noted for his serv- 
ices in developing knowledge of the strophical struc- 
ture of poetry in the Old Testament, and this 
criterion of structure he has begun to apply to the 
New Testament. He has been since 1887 one of the 
editorial board of the Wiener Zeitschri/t fUr die 
Kunde des MorgenlandeSf and besides his work as 
editor of al-Samma'i's Kitab-al-Farq (Vienna, 1876); 
al-Hamadani's " Geography of the Arabian Penin- 
sula " (2 vols., Leyden, 1884-91); and a portion of 
the " Annals " of al-Tabari (1888-^9), has written 
Himjarische Inschriften (Vienna, 1875); Himjcri- 
sche Studien (1876); SUdarabische Studien (1877); 
Bericht uber eine Reise nach Konstantinople (1878); 
Burgen und Schldsser Sudarabiens (2 parts, 1879- 
1881); Sabdische Denkmdler (in collaboration with 
J. H. Mordtmann; 1883); Siegfried hanger's Reise- 
berichte aus Syrien und Arabien und die von ihm 
entdeckten und gesammeUen Inschriften (Leipsic, 
1883); Epigraphische Denkmdler aus Arabien nach 
Abklatschen und Copien des Herm J. Euting (1889); 
Rezensionen und Versionen des Eldad honDani (1892) ; 
Die aitsemitischen Inschriften von Sendschirli in den 
kdniglichen Museen zu Berlin (1893); Epigraphi- 
sche Denkmdler aus Abessinien nach Abklatschen 
von J. Theodore Bent (1894); Ezechiel-Studien (Ber- 
lin, 1895); Die Propheten in ihrer ursprUnglichen 
Form (2 vols., Vienna, 1895); Die Haggadah von 
Sarajevo (in collaboration with J. von Schlosser; 
1898); Sudarabische AUertUmer in kunsthistori- 
schen Hofmuseum (1899); Die Mehrir- und Soqotri- 
Sprache (2 vob., 1902-05) ; Die Gesetze Hammurabi's 
und ihr VerhOltnis zur mosaischen Gesetsgebung 
some zu den Zwdlf Tafeln (1903); Das syrisch- 
rdmische Rechtsbuch und Hammurabi (1905); Sem- 
itica, contributed to the Sitzungsberichte of the 
Vienna Academy (1906); a series of Biblische Stu 
dien, reproduced from various periodicals (5 parts. 




ina the Dtath of Mr. M iiUrr, ib. 1909. For minute and 
(k'Uiilcd urcouitt^ of the iiustitutiou consult the Annunl 

MUELLER, HEINRICH: Gennan Lutheran; 
b. at Liiheck Oct. 18, liVM; d. at Kostwk (41 in. 
n.e. of Schwcrin) Sept. 17, l(J7o. lie sludieil at 
Grcifswakl an<i Uosli)ck; ontere<l the ministry at 
Rostock, KitVJ; hecainc arcliidiakonu-s there, l()o3; 
professor of (ireek in the university, 1G51), and of 
theology, 1C()2. Doctrinally, Miiller occupied a 
middle ground in Lutheran tlieology, an<l hia or- 
thodoxy was pervaded with the warm glow of an 
intimate personal faith, so that he stood out as one 
of the most eminent figures in the era preceding 
Pietism. And as such he was called to cooperat-e 
in the renewal of ecclesiastical life in the l^vangel- 
ical church of (Jermany. In his sermons anil de- 
votional writings, Miiller often reveals a masterful 
and " popular " elo<iuence. As a devotional writer, 
Miiller was exceedingly prolific. Among his works 
are: Der hhnmlische Livbeskusa (l()o9; new ed. by 
Fiedler, 18.':<1, Hamburg, 1848); Kreuz Burs und 
Beiarhule (lG(jl); Jictrachlungen iiher ilcn I4S. 
psalm (new ed., Hamburg, 1853; Leijwic, 1872); 
*' collected Sermons" (2 vols., 1003-72); Scfiluss- 
kette und Kraft hem (1003; reissue, Halle, 1853, 
1855); Evangdiache Schlusskvlte (1072; reissued, 
Halle, 1855); FefiUtvamjdisiche Schlusskdte (1073; 
new ed., Halle, 1855); Die yeistlicheti Erquick- 
atunden (1004; later e<litions, Leipsic, 1872; Ham- 
burg, 1881); Kng. transl.. Hours of Sjnrilual Re- 
frenhrnerU, London, 1840); Der gvistliche Dankaliar 
(1008); I>ie ungcratctw Ehc (l(i08); Thranen- und 
TroHtqudle oder der Ueiland uiui der Sunder (Frank- 
fort, 1070; new ed., Halle, 1S55). After Mailer's 
death there api)eareil Der evangeliscJie Ilerzena- 
Bpivgd (1070), briefer homilies on the Evangelical 
pericopes (new etlition, 2 vols., Hambui^, 1882, 
1S84); Da8 eratujeliftdw Pra^nervfUiv under den 
Scfuiden Joscpfia in alien dreicn Stdnden (1081); and 
his funeral discourses, (Jrdher der Heiligen (1(>85). 
Miiller also composed a numl)er of spiritual hymns, 
of which several have been adopted in the Church 
hymnals. Hkrmann Beck. 

BinuooKAPHT. Biogmphies have b«?n written by C. O. 
F. Aii'hol, HoDihurK. 1854, auii by O. C. Knibbo, KoHtock, 
1860. ('oni«ult further: E. K. Koch, Oewhirhte den Kir- 
chenliedfH^ iv. 07 s<iq., Stuttgart. ISOS; C. O. Schmidt, 
Gefurhu'/iU- dtir Pud^t. pp. 100-110, (lotha, 1872; K. 
Pnliucr, Lfif'tiMiildtr von ErftauunyHivhrifttstdler, vol. i., 
Stultf^art. 1870, A. F. W. Fwchcr, Kirchrnliedrr lArxikon, 
p. lt">S, (lothn, 1S78, H. I^ck, Die reli(/it'se Volk^Uteratur 
der cvanaclischcn Kirche Deutachlands, (jotha, 1891. 

MUELLER, JOHANN GEORG: The name of two 

1. Swiss Reformed teacher and educator; b. at 
SchafThausen (23 m. n.n.e. of Zurich, Switzeriand), 
Sept. 8, 1759; d. there Sept. 20, 1819. Being of a 
religious turn of mind and under the influence of 
Liivatcr's *' Glimpses into Eternity '' and Young's 
Night TfumghtSf he determined to study theology, 
which he did first at Zurich and later in Dessau, 
Bremen, and Bemburg. But MCkller had not ^* 
begun to build on a sure basis» and whffe ' 
tingen his religious perplexities so iDOl 
he turned to Herder for <Mffl»wtJo>ftft, 
Weimar, he was taken by Herder iiH 

for 6LX months, and the attachment thus formed 
was a lasting one. Under Herder's influence Miiller 
IxK^ame freer, more full of life, and w^as spurred on 
to further research. On his return home, Muller 
found his foundation alarmingly weak in spite of 
the many theologies with which his head was filled. 
He became bewildered in endeavoring to read the 
Bible with understanding; accordingly he concluded 
to put aside all theological books, even the Bible, 
and to devote himself for two years to classical 
literature. On resuming Ids Bible study he attained 
the conviction he sought, based on the eternal 
truth of divine revelation. Not being able to fill a 
pastorate because of ill health, he accepted a pro- 
fessorship in tlic College of Humaiuty, Schaifhauaen, 
and devoted his time to science and writing. His 
works were addressed in particular to the young, 
his endeavor being to make the Bible in its magnifi- 
cence and humanity once more of practical value. 
He agreed fully with the Augsbuig and Helvetian 
Confessions and his theology differed rather in form, 
than materially, from the older system. He sought 
to simplify theology, to banish scholasticism, to 
free the religion of Jesus from its Jewish garb, to 
present it pure and practicable, in short, to hu- 
manize theology; although its first principle — ^posi- 
tive revelation — would have to remain the some. 
At first lecturer, in 1794 he became professor of 
Greek and Hebrew, and later of encyclopedia and 
methodology in the College of Humanity. He was 
thro\Mi out of his clerical position by the Revolu- 
tion, and cheerfully accepted the situation, believ- 
ing that he could in that way best serve his city. 
Through the confidence of his fellow citizens he 
was appointed first representative of the people, 
then a member of the city council, and last deputy 

Midler's chief works are Philoaophische Au/sdUe 
(Breslau, 1789) ; UrUerhaltungen mit Serena (2 parts, 
Wintherthur, 1793-1802; 3d ed., 3 parts, part iii. 
ed. lurchhofcr, 1834-35); Bekenntniaae MerkwHr- 
diger Mdnner von sich sdbst (16 vols., 1792-1809); 
Briefe aber das Siudium der WiMenachaften, beson- 
ders der Geschichle (Filssli, 1798); Ud)er ein Wart, 
das Fram I, von den Folgen der Reformation 
gesagt hahen soU (1800); Reliquien alter Zeiten, 
Sitten und Meinungen (4 parts, Leipsic, 1803-06); 
Von Glauben der ChrisUn, VoHesungen (2d ed., 
2 vols., Wintcrthur, 1823); and Ud)er ckriMchen 
Rdigiansunterricht (1809). (G. Kirchhofbr.) 

BiBUoaRAPHT.* Sources are; Tlie outobiosraphy, produced 
in ProUdantische MonatMOiUtem, xviii (1861), 36 sqq.; 
the BnefweefuH between hunaelf and his brother, the his- 
torian Johann von Mailer, ed. E. Haug, Frauenfeld. ISQ8. 
Ck>n8ult further: Hie biography by K. Stokar, BomU 
1886; three lectures by J. KirDhhofer. in Unoth, ZeOtdkrifl 
jUar QtttkiehtM wad AUertum dn Standet SehaJfhauMm, i. 
65 sqq., Sehaffhauwn, 1864; and AvfMa^nunom pom 
Johann Ooorg Muttar, ed. J. Blohtold. Beriin. 1881. 

8. German Reformed teacher and comparative 

leKgioniBt; b. in Basel, SwHieriand, May 8, 1800; 

d. there Aug. 81, 1875. Fram 1818 to 1825 iie 

U T^'^f'f^T and thwolqgy at the Hbchaehule 

fete uhfa taaeher ia theol- 

atlijiMlfni lectures by 

<t his eiaminatiops 

Ts iMowne tcsflhsr 




of Latin in the P&dagogium in Basel, 1828; in 1831, 
after taking his degree of licentiate, was appointed 
assistant teacher in the theological faculty; and in 
1835 became professor. 

He studied the works of Philo, of Josephus, and 
of the apostolic Fathers, as auxiliaries for his spe- 
daity, New-Testament exegesis and introduction; 
he published an edition of Philo's *' Creation " 
(Berlin, 1841), and later ErHdrung des Bamabas- 
brie/es (Leipsic, 1869). In 1870 appeared a Pro- 
gfxtm on Philo's messianic prophesies. His edition 
of Josephus' Apian was published by two of his 
colleagues, Riggenbach and Orelli (Basel, 1877). 
His most valued labor was done in his lectures on 
intioduction to the New Testament. His other 
field was comparative religion. In his early study 
of the philosophy of religion, he was strongly op- 
posed to a priori reasoning, sought solid historical 
foundation for his belief, and studied carefully the 
ethnic religions. Although there was no chair of 
comparative religion, MUller continued to give 
lectures on the history of polytheistic religions, of 
which little was known at that time. His Geachichte 
dor amerikafdschen Urrdigianen (Basel, 1855) is a 
product of this period. He also studied the eth- 
nographical problem of the relation between the 
Semites and Hamites, and published a program in 
1860, in which he asks: ** Who are the Semites, 
and on what authority do we say, ' Semitic lan- 
guages '? "; a second program, of 1864, treats of 
the nationality of the Hyksos and the Philistines; 
and in another at Gotha in 1872, Die Semilen in 
ihrem Verh/dUniss zu Chamiien und JaphetUen, \e 
tried to prove that " Semite " was the designation 
of a group of related peoples, and not a proper name 
for a class of languages, and that the so-called 
" Semitic " languages should be called '^ Hamitic.'' 
Holler published an autobiographical sketch before 
his death. (Jacob KCndiq.) 

MUELLER, JULIUS: German Lutheran theo- 
logian; b. at Brieg (28 m. s.e. of Breslau) Apr. 10, 
1801 ; d. at Halle Sept. 27, 1878. He studied juris- 
prudence and theology at the universities of Bres- 
Uu (1819-20), Gdttingen (1822-23), and Berlin 
(1823-24), graduaUy coming to feel more and more 
that his interests lay in theology rather than in law. 
In 1825 he was called to the pastorate of Schdn- 
brunn. Here, however, he became involved in con- 
troversy, denying the right of the government to 
interfere in church affairs and refusing to use either 
the agenda or the union ritual. He was saved from 
deposition by a call to become imiversity preacher 
at Gdttingen in 1830. In the following year he be- 
came privat-docent, and in 1834 was appointed as- 
sociate professor, and in the same year he was 
called to Marburg as professor of dogmatics. Here he 
was called to defend the point of view of a truly 
scientific and believing theology against the ever- 
increasing onslaught of the anti-Christian philoso- 
phy of the times; and here, too, he wrote his chief 
theological work, his CkrisUiche Lehre von der 
Sunde (2 vob., Breslau, 1839-44; Eng. transl., 2 
vols., Edinburgh, 1877). The point of view is the 
Protestant tenet of unrestricted scientific investi- 
pUioQ which recognises no other authority than 

the immutable basis of the Bible. At the same time 
M Oiler sought to avoid all conflict between scientific 
thought and Christian feeling, insisting especially 
that reflection on sin must not lead to the anni- 
hilation of " religious awe." According to Mullcr 
not only did the doctrine of sin hitherto in vogue 
rest on an antiquated metaphysics, but sin was 
neither adequately expressed nor sufiiciently ex- 
plained ; nor could the antinomy, resulting from the 
view that sin could be committed only by free will, 
while no factor in the empirical development of the 
individual could bear the weight of such voluntary 
decision, be solved by the ecclesiastical doctrine 
of original sin. His solution was the assumption 
of an intelligible self-decision. But if the resolve 
to maintain the deepest truths justified seeking 
a better scientific foundation, nevertheless a 
theology truly revised on the basis of belief could 
be established only on a purer and profounder con- 
cept and foundation of Christian truth than was 
afforded by the teachings of the Church. In so far 
as a theology thus established on the great princi- 
ples of general Protestant belief thrust into the 
background denominational differences, it neces- 
sarily implied the tendency to union which is clearly 
evident as a fundamental tenet of Mailer's system 
of thought. 

Mailer's doctrine of sin not only conditioned his 
entire attitude toward theology and the Church, 
but also determined his subsequent career. His im- 
portance became ever more evident, and in 1839 he 
was called from Marburg to Halle. Seven years 
later he was a deputy of the faculty of Halle to the 
General Synod, where he earnestly advocated union, 
his early opposition to this movement being removed 
by the change in the policy of church government. 
Entirely disapproving the course hitherto taken for 
union of the Lutheran and Reformed, MUller held 
that if uniformity in worship and in church gov- 
ernment were to have any value, both must rest on 
uniformity of belief; and an adequate expression of 
this consensus he held was expressed in the new 
formula of ordination proposed by Nitzsch. Here 
his idea was to preserve the denominational charac- 
teristics of each congregation, for if ordination thus 
became the expression of the unionistic standpoint 
of the entire church, nevertheless denominational 
rights were expressly recognized in the calling of 
pastors. It is easy to see that Miiller's peculiar at- 
titude was not understood, even though he de- 
fended it in Die erste Generaleynode der evangeli- 
achen Landeskirche Preussena und die IcirMichen 
Bekennlnisse (Breslau, 1847). The confirmation 
and execution of the decisions of the synod dragged 
on imtil ended by the revolution of 1848; but the 
ensuing reaction in Church and State compelled him 
to resume the struggle. He now felt that he must 
defend the actual existence of the union, and be- 
sides a series of papers bearing on the problem he 
published an irenic statement of his views, designed 
to reconcile the moderate Lutherans, in Die evaiv- 
gelische Union, ihr Wesen und ihr gdttliches Recht 
(Berlin, 1854). While the results of Mailer's strug- 
gle for the union was successful in so far as the Re- 
formed were placed on an equal footing with the 
Lutherans in Prussia (and more he had not hoped 




for), he was deeply pained by having to combat 
those with whom he felt himself one in faith. Lone- 
liness and illness now beset him, and in 1856 he 
suffered a stroke of apoplexy. A year later, how- 
ever, he was able to resume his lectures, which he 
continued for twenty-two years. But furtl^er ex- 
tensive literary work was impossible, though he 
collected his GesammeUe DogmaUsche Abhandlungen 
(Bremen, 1870), originally published in the DeuUche 
Zeitackrifi fiir chrisUiche Wisaenachaft und chriU- 
lickes Leben, which he had founded in 1850 with 
Neander and Nitzsch. In 1878, a few months be- 
fore his death, he retired from active life. 

(David Hupfeld.) 

Hibliographt: M. K&hler, Dr. Juliu» MuUer, der haUiache 
Doffmotiker, Halle, 1898; L. Sohultxe, Dr. Julius M aUer, 
MiUheiliingen avM aeinem Leben^ Bremen, 1879. 


German Protestant; b. at Langenbuiig (46 m. n.e. 
of Stuttgart) Sept. 3, 1852. He was educated at 
the universities of Ttibingen (1870-74; Ph.D., 1876; 
lie. theol., 1878) and G6ttingen (1876-77), inter- 
rupting his studies in 1875-76 to serve as curate at 
Ludwigsburg. He was a lecturer at the Tubingen 
theological seminary (1878-80), became privat- 
docent for theology at Berlin (1880), and associate 
professor (1882). In 1884 he went in a similar 
capacity to Halle; to Giessen as full professor (1886) ; 
to Breslau, as professor of church history (1891); 
and to the University of Tubingen (1903). He has 
written : Der Kampf Ludwigs des Bayem mit der rOmi- 
achen Kirche (2 vols., Tubingen, 1879-80); Die An- 
f&nge des MinorUerwrdens und der Bus^bruderachaften 
(Freiburg, 1885); Die Waldenaer und ihre eimdnen 
Grwppen hia zum Anfang dea vierzehrUen Jahrhun- 
derta (Gotha, 1886) ; Kirchengeachichte (2 parts, Frei- 
burg, 1892-1902); Lu^ier und Karlatadt (Tubingen, 
1907) ; and Die Eaalinger Pfarrkirche im MittelaUer, 
in WUrttembergiache Vierteljahrahefte fUr Landea- 
geachichUj xvi (1907). 

MX7ELLER, WILHELM MAX: Lutheran; b. at 
Gleissenberg (a village near WaldmUnchen (38 m. 
n.e. of Regensburg), Bavaria, May 15, 1862. He 
was educated at the universities of Erlangen, Leip- 
sic (Ph.D., 1893), Berlin, and Munich. In 1888 he 
left Germany for the United States, and after two 
years' residence in New York CJity was appointed 
in 1890 to his present position of professor of Old- 
and New-Testament exegesis at the Reformed 
Episcopal Seminary, Philadelphia. He has written 
Aaien und Europa nach aU&gyptiachen Denkmdlem 
(Leipsic, 1893); Die Liebeapoeaie der aUen Aegypter 
(1899); and Egyptological Reaearchea (Washington, 

OF: A disputation between Lutherans and Re- 
formed at the castle of MUmpelgart (a town better 
known to English readers under its French name 
Montb^liard, near the French border, 37 m. w. of 
Basel), Mar. 21-26, 1586. This was occasioned by 
the incorporation of the county of MUmpelgart into 
the duchy of WUrttemberg by inheritance. As early 
as 1526 Farel had preached the Gospel in MUmpel- 
gart, but soon had to flee. In 1535, however, a 
Calvinistic type of the Reformation was established 

by Toesanus, a Reformed Frenchman; then the 
duke of WUrttembei^ attempted to reorganise the 
church on the Lutheran model. Many Calvinists 
had found a refuge in MUmpelgart from French 
persecution, but were not easily admitted to the 
Lord's Supper. In order to create more friendly 
relations with the Lutherans, the disputation was 
arranged. On the Lutheran side, Jacob Andreas and 
Lucas Osiander of Tubingen were commissioned, 
together with two political councilors, Hans Wolf 
von Anweil and Friedrich SchUtz. On the Reformed 
side therQ were present Beza, Abraham Musculus, 
preacher at Bern; Anton Fajus, deacon at Geneva; 
Peter Hybner, professor of Greek in Bern; Claudius 
Alberius, professor of philosophy in Lausanne, and 
the two councilors, Samuel Meyer of Bern and An- 
ton Marisius of Geneva. The points of controversy 
were (1) the Lord's Supper, (2) the person of Christ, 
(3) pictures and ceremonies, (4) baptism, and (5|i 
election. The proceedings were not taken down in 
writing, but both parties in the beginning handed 
in written copies of their theses. Both parties 
claimed the victory. Against the agreement there 
was later published a protocol in the interest of the 
Lutherans. Beza disputed the correctness of the 
Acta of Tubingen and defended himself in Latin 
and German. A deputation from WUrttembeig 
requested at Bern satisfaction for the allegation of 
foi^gery which had been repeated by Musculus, but 
the deputation made no impression upon the Re- 
formed. The only result of the disputation was a 
deepening of the differences between the two parties. 

BiBUOORAPHTr Sources are: Acta cxtUoquii MontU BeUir 
ffartenna, TQbingen, 1594; Ad acta coUoguii Montubeli- 
oardensis, T. Beta reapontdo, Geneva, 1587-^. Consult: 
H. J. J. Heppe, T. Beta, Lthen und auagew&hUe SchriSten, 
pp. 267 sqq., Elberfeld, 1861. 

FRIEDRICH OTTO: German divine; b. at Han- 
over Dec. 8, 1807; d. at Buer (10 m. n. of Essen), 
district of MUnster, Nov. 7, 1882; studied at LUne- 
burg, Holzminden, Gdttingen, Berlin, and at the 
preachers' seminary at Hanover. In 1840 he was 
appointed pastor at Lamspringe, near Hildesheim; 
in 1851, superintendent at Catlenbuig; and in 1855, 
consistorial councilor and superintendent at Buer, 
and member of the ecclesiastical court of Osna- 
brUck. He was a zealous advocate of the complete 
separation of State and Church, which he sup- 
ported in the ZeUachrift fur Protestantiamua und 
Kirche f and in the Gdttinger MoruUaachrift (184G- 
1847). He engaged in a controversy with Hofling 
over the latter's Grundadtze evangeliach4utheriacher 
Kirchenverfaaaung^ to refute which he published 
Daa Ami dea Neuen Teatamenta nach Lehre der 
Schrifi und der luiheriachen Bekenntniaae (Osterode, 
n.d.). He was the author also of Daa Dogma von 
der aichtbaren und unsichtbaren Kirche (G6ttingen, 

1854). (J. G. W. UHLHORNt.) 

MUENSCHER, WILHELM: German theologian; 
b. at Hersfeld (32 m. s.s.e. of Cassel) Mar. 15, 1766; 
d. at Marburg July 28, 1814. He studied at the 
gymnasium of his native town and at the Uni- 
versity of Marburg; officiated for some time as 
assistant to his father, pastor at Hersfeld; became 




in 1789 pastor of the collegiate church there; was 
three years later called to the chair of theology at 
the University of Marburg. Although his activity 
embraced all branches of theology except Old- 
Testament exegesis, he is known chiefly through 
his writings on doctrinal theology and church his- 
tory. His theological standpoint was that of a 
moderate rationalist, and for him the mission of 
doctrinal theology was to answer the question 
" How and why has the doctrine of Christianity 
gradually assumed its present form? " This ques- 
tion he endeavored to answer in a series of essays 
in various periodicals. He was the author also of 
Handbuch der ehrUUichen Dogmengeschic?Ue (4 vols., 
Marburg, 1797); Lekrbueh der chrisUichen Kirchen- 
gegekichU (Marburg, 1804); and a Lekrbueh der 
chruUichen Dogmengeschichte (Marburg, 1811). 

(A. Hauck.) 

Bxbuogbapht: His life and writings were edited by L. 
Wadhler, Frankfort, 1817. Consult also the Vermich einer 
Omckiehtt der heaaiach-reformierien Kxrche by bis son, W. 
MOnscher, Cassel, 1850. 


Humanistic, Social, and Religious Fermeat ((1). 
Bemhard Rothmann; the Sixteen Articles ($2). 
Rntiance of Radical Elements ($3). 
Anabaptist Radicalism in Control (§ 4). 
Anabaptist Theocracy; Siege of the City (} 5). 
Capture of the City; Pimishment of the Leaders (S 6). 

The Anabaptist movement in Milnster grew out 
of the Reformation in that city, and this again 
stood in closest relation to revolutionary tendencies 
wi^n the city. The opposing parties were the 
town as represented by the council and the bishop 
or cathedral chapter, as well as the patricians, as 
opptosed to the gUds and common people. It was 
during the struggle among these dif- 
I. Humanis- ferent parties for leadership that the 

tic, Social, spark of the Reformation was kindled 
and in Milnster. Merchants, especially 

Religioas from Frankfurt, seem to have brought 

Ferment the first message; Evangelical influ- 
ences proceeding mostly from Augus- 
tine friars in neighboring cities had their effect, 
while Humanism prepared the way. At the insti- 
gation of Rudolph von Langen, the cathedral school 
in Manster had since 1500 through the instruction 
it furnished in Latin and Greek extended widely 
its influence. Among the first who began in Milns- 
ter to confess deviating religious opinions were the 
Humanists Johann Glandorp and Adolf Clarenbach, 
teacher at the school of St. Martin. Peter Gym- 
oich of Alx-la-Chapelle, a distinguished scholar and 
canon of St. Martin's, had been on terms of friend- 
ship with Luther since 1520; Arnold Bellholt, a 
patrician, had similar relations with Carlstadt. In 
1524 the Reformation seems to have been publicly 
proclaimed and advocated by the preachers of the 
different churches in Miinster. In 1525 occurred 
the first outbreak of the suppressed ferment, a sig- 
nificant element of which was the union between 
social and religious interests. The impetus was 
given by the revolt of the peasants which moved 
down the Rhine into the neighborhood of Munster. 
At the instigation of the gilds the populace on 
May 22, 1525, attacked unsuccessfully the rich 
moDa^teiy of Niesing; in spite of this failure the 

gilds demanded the abolition of the economical 
competition of the monastery. The movement 
spread further, the gilds and common people adopted 
and presented to the council the so-called Articles 
of Frankfurt which expressed their demands for 
far-reaching social and religious reforms, such as 
the abolition of spiritual jurisdiction over citizens 
and of the immunity of the clergy. Under pres- 
sure from the council, the chapter signed some arti- 
cles, but immediately left the city and presented 
to the bishop a writ of complaint, while the coun- 
cil abolished the economical competition between 
the gilds and the monastery of Niesing by con- 
fiscating the looms and withdrawing the annuities. 

A reaction occurred, however, after the insurrec- 
tion of the peasants had been suppressed. Under 
the pressure of the archbishop of Cologne the coun- 
cil felt itself compelled to sacrifice the articles of 
1525 and to restore to the monasteries their former 
privileges. After the restoration of the status quo 
anUf the cathedral chapter returned to the city 
and the Evangelical preachers were banished. But 
with these repressive measures the 
2. Bemhard anti-clerical movement was in no way 
Rothmann; conquered; discord between Bishop 
the Sixteen Friedrich von Wied and the cathedral 
Articles, chapter gave occasion to a new Evan- 
gelical movement under the leader- 
ship of Bemhard Rothmann, not in MUnster itself 
but before the gates of the city, on the territory of 
the bishop, at St. Mauritz (1531). Rothmann was 
bom about 1495 at Stadtlohn in the bishopric of 
Milnster, educated in his native city, in MUnster 
and Deventer, was for a time a teacher and then 
studied at the University of Mainz. In 1529 he be- 
came preacher of St. Mauritz, but he soon joined 
the Evangelical party and became its leader. He 
increased the excitement among the people when 
the character of his sermons became known through- 
out the city; on the night of Good Friday, 1531, a 
mob went into his church, defiled the altars, and 
erected in the churchyard a pulpit for Rothmann, 
who defied all prohibitory injunctions of the chap- 
ter. As the movement spread further, the Protes- 
tant party endeavored to unite with the Evan- 
gelicals throughout the empire. For this purpose 
Rothmann visited Wittenberg (where he became 
acquainted with Melanchthon), Speier, Strasburg 
(where he met Capito and Schwenckfeld), perhaps 
also Marburg. After his return he preached openly 
the Lutheran doctrine. Disagreements between the 
cathedral chapter and the bishop were favorable 
to Rothmann 's actions, but in 1532 he was com- 
pelled to flee. The confession of Rothmann, which 
was printed and everywhere distributed, betrays 
in form and contents the influence of Melanchthon, 
of the Augsburg Confession, but also of Zwingli 
and not less of the Anabaptists. In Feb., 1532, the 
adherents of Rothmann stormed the church of St. 
Lambert, and an Evangelical congregation was 
constituted. The opposing Roman party, unable 
to take any effective measures against the gilds 
and common people, felt greatly relieved at the 
resignation of Friedrich von Wied as bishop on 
Mar. 24, 1532. His successor, Duke Erich of Braun- 
schweig-Gmbenhagen, bishop of Paderborn and 




OsnabrQck, had sharply suppressed the Evangelical 
movement in his territories, but his sudden death 
on May 14 frustrated all hopes of the Catholics and 
furnished the occasion for a new Evangelical ad- 
vance. The newly elected Bishop Franz of Wal- 
deck, at the same time bishop of Minden and Osna- 
briick, demanded the removal of the Evangelical 
preachers and the restoration of Roman Cath- 
olic worship (June 28), but the citizens formed a 
league for the protection of Rothmann and elected 
a committee of thirty-six men for the purpose of 
obtaining not only permission to preach the Gos- 
pel freely, but also its sole recognition in the city. 
In a formal agreement the council pledged itself to 
protect the Gospel and requested the Roman clergy 
to refute Rothmann from Scripture. As these 
refused a disputation, the offices of all churches in 
the city, with the exception of the cathedral, were 
filled with Evangelical preachers (Aug. 10) while 
the populace destroyed pictures and altars. The 
Evangelicals had already sought the protection of 
Landgrave Philip of Hesse (q.v.), who, in the neigh- 
borhood of MUnster, had asserted his influence in 
favor of the Gospel. In two letters of July 30, ad- 
dressed to the council and the bishop, Philip had 
endeavored to reconcile the opponents by permit- 
ting Evangelical preaching, at the same time con- 
tinuing the revenues of the Roman clergy. At a 
request of Rothmann, dating from July 16, two 
Evangelical preachers, Gottfried Stralen and Peter 
Wertheim, had been sent to Munster. Neverthe- 
less, the bishop required the return of the city 
to Catholicism, appealing to the edict of Worms 
and the result of the Augsburg diet, while the 
Evangelicals relied upon the Interim of the Diet of 
Nuremberg (1532) and the imperial mandate of 
Regensburg (Aug. 3, 1532). An attempt of the city 
to induce the interference of the Schmalkaid 
league failed. On Aug. 16 Rothmann and the other 
Evangelical preachers presented sixteen articles 
on the ** abuses " of the Roman Church, and these 
showed an inclination toward Zwinglianism, es- 
pecially in the conception of the Lord's Supper. 
In spite of the warnings of Luther and Melanch- 
thon, Rothmann administered the Lord's Supper 
with wine and wheat bread which was to be broken 
by the conamunicants. There was nothing left to the 
council but to yield and to reciuest Roman Catho- 
lics not to officiate in the cathedral at Christmas 
and not to administer baptism. A successful at- 
tack of the neighboring town Telgt in the night of 
the twenty-sixth of December delivered almost the 
entire episcopal aristocracy and some patricians of 
Miinster into the hands of the Evangelicals. Owing 
to the intervention of Landgrave Philip, a treaty 
of peace between the town and the bishop was ob- 
tained on Feb. 14, 1533. Until the decision of a 
general free Christian council the six churches of 
Miinster with their revenues and the right of filling 
vacancies were given over to the citizens for Evan- 
gelical church service while the bishop, the cathe- 
dral chapter, and the other colleges were allowed to 
adhere unconditionally to their religion. But at 
the very time when the Evangelicals had obtained 
sufficient concessions upon which to build up their 
work of reform on a solid basis, discord arose with- 

in their own ranks. Radical elements, hitherto in 
the background, gained control and won over even 
the influential personality of Rothmann. 

The b^innings of radicalism in Munster arc 
veiled in obscurity. Undoubtedly the movement« 
of the enthusiasts in the neighborhood wielded some 
influence, but the decisive moment arrived at the 
end of 1532 when in consequence of measures taken 

by the government of Julich the so- 

3. Entrance called Wassenberg preachers went over 

of Radical to MUnster, men who, like Heinrich 

Elements. Roll, Dionysius Vinne, and others who 

were influenced more or less by Melchior 
Hoffmann (q.v.), held a spiritualistic conception 
of the Lord's Supper and had a low estimate of in- 
fant baptism. [Far greater than that of Hoffmann 
was the influence of Erasmus, Carlstadt, and Ger- 
hard Westerburg on the Wassenbeig preachers. 
There is evidence that HiUlmaier's writings were 
also known in these circles. There is no evidence 
that any of the Wassenbeig preachers had adopted 
distinctively Hoffmannite views until after the ar- 
rival in MUnster of the emissaries of Matthys. The 
views and methods of Matthys should be distin- 
guished from those of Hoffmann. While Hoffmann 
was chiliastic and predicted the setting up of the 
kingdom of Christ in Strasburg, he did not reach 
the point of declaring that the time had actually 
come for the forcible setting up of the kingdom 
and the slaughter of the ungodly. For much valu- 
able information about the Wassenberg preachers 
cf. Karl Rembert's Die " Wiedertdufer " in Her- 
zogium Julich, Berlin, 1899. a. h. n.] They found 
support among the gilds, and Rothmann, although 
in the beginning an opponent of the enthusiasts, had 
met their views in the sixteen articles. Thus there 
was on the one side a conservative Lutheran party, 
relying upon the coimcil as the Evangelical author- 
ity, led by Johann von der Wieck, and striving after 
a union with the Schmalkaid league, on the other 
side the enthusiasts, relying upon the democracy and 
led by Rothmann. Philip of Hesse acted as media- 
tor, at the same time being the go-between of town 
and bishop. Under the influence of Roll, Roth- 
mann began to preach against the Lord's Supper 
and baptism, while Hermann Staprade, one of the 
Wassenberg preachers, became second preacher of 
the church of St. Lambert, and under their influence 
the people were carried away to iconoclasm. A dis- 
putation was held on Aug. 7 and 8, 1533, in order 
to settle the differences among the Evangelicals. 
The conservative side was represented by Professor 
Hermann von dem Busche of Marburg, while Roth- 
mann, Vinne, Klopriss, and others represented the 
enthusiasts. The result was unfavorable to the 
conservatives; Rothmann defended his view that 
the baptism of children is unscriptural, Busch de- 
sisted from a reply, and the doctrine of the Lord's 
Supper was not discussed at all. Consequently the 
ordinance of the council against innovations re- 
mained without effect since Rothmann and his ad- 
herents openly defied it (Sept. 17). Thereupon the 
council closed the churches and deposed Roth- 
mann from his ministerial office, but the gilds and 
commoners gained for him liberty to preach. In 
this distress the Lutherans united with the Roman 




Catholics and the bishop; in consequence Roll, 
Staprade, Vinne, and Stralen were banished, while 
Rothmann was forbidden to preach. Thus the situ- 
ation which obtained after the conclusion of peace 
in Feb., 1533, seemed to be restored, and the coun- 
cil concluded to establish Evangelical church in- 
stitutions with the aid of preachers sent by the 
Landgrave of Hesse. A church order was called 
into life, and the pulpits were occupied by Evan- 
gelical preachers. 

In Jan., 1534, there followed a change by reason 
of the adoption in Miinster of the ideas of Melchior 
Hoffmann (q.v.). Hitherto the Wassenberg tend- 
ency, mitigated by Evangelical conservative prece- 
dents, had dominated the adherents 
4. Anabaptist of Rothmann, i.e., the Lord's Supper 
Radicalism had been celebrated as a Passover 
in ControL meal and the necessity of the baptism 
of children energetically refuted, with- 
out, however, drawing any antitrinitarian or Ana- 
baptist inferences. But after the summer of 1533 
Melchiorites flocked into the city and amalgamated 
with the Wassenberg people. In Dec., 1533, the 
banished preachers retiuned to the city, and the 
appearance of two disciples of Jan Matthys in 
Jan., 1534, gained the victoiy for Melchioritism. 
Jan Matthys, a baker of Haarlem, who regarded 
himself as the promised Enoch, was penetrated by 
Hoffmann's idea of the expansion of the Gospel of 
the covenant. Rothmann, Klopriss, Vinne, Roll, 
Stralen, and Staprade were baptized, while within 
eight days the number of baptized persons increased 
to 1,400. An attempt of the council to expel the 
preachers again failed. A covenant of the baptized 
was formed after the arrival of Johann Bockhold 
or Jan Bockelson (generally known by his as- 
sumed name John of Leyden, q.v.) and Gert tom 
Kloster at the invitation of Matthys (Jan. 13). The 
Dutchmen found the ready support of the democ- 
racy, especially of KnipperdoUing, the fanatical 
champion of govenunent by the people, and gained 
the support also of the preachers. Their adherents 
were {hedged to certain articles of faith, the so- 
called Articles of M Ouster, which in the refusal 
of obedience to '* pagan '' authority followed the 
Dutch type, and in Feb., 1534, John of Leyden 
and KnipperdoUing began to proclaim the segrega- 
tion oi the communion of the just before the divine 
judgment of wTath. On Feb. 11 they obtained by 
force the guaranty of entire freedom of faith, com- 
pleting thereby the victory of Anabaptism over the 
party of order. The adherents of the latter left the 
dty, while the Anabaptists in unbridled fanaticism 
suMXssfully carried on a most active propaganda. 
Jan Matthys now entered MOnster; KnipperdoUing 
became burgermaster; the populace spoiled and 
devastated the monasteries and the cathedral; 
while all the " godless " were exp>elled. Appealing 
to Acts ii., Jan Matthys began with the introduc- 
tion of the community of goods, for the administrar 
Uon of which seven " deacons " were installed. On 
Mar. 15, all books in the city were burnt, with the 
exception of the Bible which became the law book 
of the '* New Jerusalem." A bloody defeat sub- 
dued the opposition of the citizens. 

In the mean time the bishop had prepared a reg- 

ular siege which was strengthened by the aid of Cleve, 
Cologne, and Hesse. The radicalism and fatalism 
which characterized Hoffmann's principles induced 
the besieged for the time being to desist from 
attempts at organization, and the same 
5. Anabap- defects led Jan Matthys on Apr. 5, 
tistXheoc- on the basis of a supposed revelation, 
racy; Siege to make a sally in which he found his 
of the City, death. John of Leyden became his 
successor. He completed the organ- 
ization of the " New Jerusalem " by overthrowing 
the old municipal constitution and replacing it 
with a divinely revealed constitution of Israel. 
" Twelve elders of the twelve tribes of Israel " as- 
sumed all worldly and spiritual power in MUnster. 
John of Leyden was appointed speaker of the elders 
and at the same time had charge of the military 
forces. These were now organized so excellently 
that the besieged gained continual victories over 
the besieging forces of the bishop. Following the 
example of the patriarchs, on the basis of Gen. i. 
28 and an inference from I Tim. iii. 2 to the effect 
that the common man had more than one wife, in- 
duced also by the social anomaly of a great surplus 
of women, John of Leyden introduced polygamy; 
Rothmann even took nine wives. These conditions 
led the more considerate citizens to a final attempt 
to overcome the movement. With about two hun- 
dred adherents Heinrich Mollenhecke, a black- 
smith, succeeded in capturing John of Leyden, 
KnipperdoUing, Rothmann, and other leaders, but 
the energy of the Anabaptists prevented the open- 
ing of the gates and surrender of the town into the 
hands of the bishop, released the captured leaders, 
and took bloody vengeance on the opponents so 
that the control of the prophets became absolute. 
On Aug. 31 John of Leyden was proclaimed king 
over the chosen people and ruler of the world (Jer. 
xxiii. 2-6; Ezek. xxxvii. 21 sqq.). The new king 
immediately constructed his court; KnipperdoUing 
became viceroy, Rothmann court preacher, and other 
officers such as chanceUor, butler, court taUor, were 
added, in spite of the community of goods. Divara, 
the beautiful widow of Matthys, became queen. 
Special coins were struck with the inscription John 
i. 14, iii. 5. In accordance with Matt. x. the mis- 
sion of twenty-seven apostles was proclaimed, but 
they were soon captured and put to death. To 
further the cause, Rothmann published about this 
time his book, Restilulion rechier und gesunder christ- 
licher Lehre, according to which the restoration 
began with Luther, but was completed by Melchior 
Hoffmann, Matthys and John of Leyden. The Scrip- 
tures of the Old and New Testament are the only 
authority, the incarnation of Christ is to be con- 
ceived in a Melchioritic sense, free wUl plays a part 
in the work of redemption of Christ, baptbm is of 
instructed adults only, the communion of persons 
baptized in this way forms the church, Christ's 
kingdom is earthly. Another work, Buchlein von 
der RachCf called forth by the fate of the Anabap- 
tist apostles, attempted to prove from passages of 
the Bible that the day of the destruction of the 
godless as the harbinger of the kingdom of peace 
(Jer. xxxi.) had arrived. But owing to the vigilance 
of the besieging forces, the invasion of outside con- 




verts was inconsiderable, the sectarians could 
neither break the siege nor avoid a famine, while 
the bishop continually received reinforcements on 
terms agreed upon in Coblenz on Dec. 13, 1534, to 
the effect that after the capture of the city a new 
government should be instituted only with the con- 
sent of the princes. Prophecies of the king, awak- 
ened by repeated expectations of reinforcement 
from Holland, did not confirm the wavering trust 
of the citizens in their ruler. Increasingly the citi- 
zens responded to the promises of the bishop by 
deserting, and attempts at mediation failed. Roth- 
mann^s publication. Van Verborgenheit der Sckrift 
des Retches Christi und dem Tage des Herm, could 
not conceal the fact that the '^ day of the Liord " 
was not imminent. At a diet in Worms (Apr. 4, 
1535) the bishop succeeded in winning the imperial 
cities to the aid of the besieging army so that now 
almost the entire empire was represented before 
Miinster, while John of Leyden was compelled to 
dismiss the old men, women, and children from the 
city on account of the famine; about 1,600 armed 
men were left. 

By the aid of treason, about 400 of the besiegers 
succeeded in entering the city on the night of June 
24-25, 1535, and on the following day it was cap- 
tured. The soldiers were merciless. The king and 
queen, KnipperdoUing and Krechting 
6. Capture of were captured, while Rothmann seems 

the City; to have sought and met death. On 

Punishment June 29, the bishop himself entered 

of the the town and the dream of the ** New 

Leaders. Jerusalem " was at an end. The pos- 
sessions of the Anabaptists were of- 
fered for sale; half the spoil and all munitions were 
left to the bishop. On July 13 a solemn service of 
thanksgiving was held in the cathedral. But the 
most difficult problem now arose of regulating 
religious affairs in MQnster, because of the oppo- 
sition between Roman Catholics and Protestants. 
The Protestant party under the leadership of Philip 
of Hesse demanded the restoration of the treaty 
of Feb. 14, 1533, while the Roman Catholics with 
the cathedral chapter, the nobility, and the cities 
of the bishopric agreed upon the form of religion 
"which was approved by the emperor and the 
empire," with the removal of some abuses (July 19). 
A diet of Worms on Nov. 1 decreed the restoration 
of Catholicism and of the old municipal consti- 
tution. The bishop, however, resented these de- 
crees as forced upon him against his will, and set 
up a new "order" which brought the rule of the 
city almost entirely under his influence, thus de- 
priving the Protestants of all opportunity to regain 
their former privileges. John of Leyden, Knipper- 
doUing, and Krechting were imprisoned. A final 
offer of the king to give him his life on condition 
that the Anabaptists keep silence was refused. 
The captives were led to Miinster, tried, and cruelly 
tortured to death at the early dawn of Jan. 22, 1536; 
their corpses were hung up in iron baskets on the 
tower of the church of St. Lambert. The fall of 
MUnster was catastrophic for the entire Anabaptist 
movement. Theologians like Luther, Melanchthon, 
Menius, Corvinus, and Cochlaeus vied with each 
other in attacking the writings of Rothmann and 

of Anabaptists in general. Hand in hand with the 
fall of Anabaptism went the destruction of demo- 
cratic tendencies, and the fall of Munster confirmed 
the power of the sovereign. Even in Moravia and 
Hesse toleration of Anabaptism ceased. On the 
other hand, the doctrine itself underwent a process 
of purification, in so far as Menno Simons (see 
Simons, Menno), its regenerator, began with com- 
bating the idea of the earthly kingdom of John of 
Leyden. [It should be borne in mind that only a 
fraction of the so-called '* Anabaptists " were in- 
volved in this effort to set up the kingdom of Christ 
by force, acting under the influence of chiliastic and 
theocratic ideas induced largely by terrible persecu- 
tion and despair, a. h. n.] For the general back- 
ground of the movement, see Anabaptists, II. 

(W. K6HLER.; 

BiBUoaRAPHT: Sources are: U. Rbegius, WidderUgung der 
mUntteriachen newen VcUerUinianer und Donniiaien Be- 
kerUnuJt, Wittenberg. 1535; C. Erhard. GrOndlich HiMoria 
der mUnHeriacken WiederUiufer, Municht 1589; H. Dor- 
piua, Warhafflige Hitttoria wie daa Evangdium xu Man' 
Her anoefangeut und damach durch die WidertAuffer ver- 
sldrt, wider auffgeAi/rtt ed. Merschmann, Magdeburg, 1847; 
H. von Kemenbrocb, Qeschichte der WiederUiufer ku MUn- 
Her, ed. H. Detmer, 2 vols., MOnster, 1899-1900 (Kesscn- 
brocb's Le6«n und Schriften, critically edited witb indexes, 
containing much important information concerning re- 
ligious, social, and literary conditions in MOnster). For 
the English reader two discussions from different points 
of view are accessible in A. H. Newman, Hiel. of Antt- 
Pedobaptiam^ chaps, xxi., xxii., Philadelphia, 1897; and 
J. Janssen, JSial. of the German People, vol. v., chap, vii., 
St. Louis. 1903. Consult further: C. A. Cornelius, Die 
mUnaterische Humaniaten, Mtinster. 1851; idem, Berichieder 
Augemeugen aber daa mQnateriache WiederlAuferreicK n.p., 
1853; idem, Geachichte dea mUnHeriachen Aufruhra, Leipsic, 
1855-60; idem, Die nederl&ndiachen WiederUiufer wdhrend 
der Belagerung MUnatera, MOnster, 1869; H. W. Erfokam, 
Geachichte der protealantiachen iSdbten, Gotha, 1848; T. de 
BuaaihTe, Dea AnabaptiHea . . . et du regne de J ean Bockd- 
aohn h Manaier, Paris, 1853; K. Hase. Daa Reich der 
WiederUiufer, Leipsic. 1860; idem, Neue Propheten, 3d ed., 
ib. 1893; K. W. Boutorwok, Zur Literatur und Ge^hichU 
der Wiedert&ufer, Bonn, 1864; L. Keller, Geachichte der 
Wiedert&ufer und ihrea Reicha zu MUnUer, Mtlnstcr, 1880; 
K. Pearson, in the Modem Review, Jan.-Apr., 1884; T. 
Kielstra, Doopagexinde Bijdragen, Leyden, 1888; L. 
Schauenberg. Die Tduferbewegung in . . . Oldenberg-Det- 
menhorat, Oldenberg, 1888; K. Kautsky, Communimn in 
Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation, London, 
1897 (pp. 216-293 contain the most favorable account 
yet given of the MOnster kingdom) ; E. TumbQlt, Die Wie- 
derUiufer, Bielefeld, 1899; B. Bax, Riae and Fall of the 
Anabaptiata, London, 1903; H. Detmer, Bilder aua den 
religioaen und aocialen Unruhen in MUnater, i.-iii., MOn- 
ster, 1903-04; idem and R. Krumbholts, B. Rothmann, 
Die mUnaterachen WiederiAufera, 2 Schriften, Dortmund, 
1904. On the individual leaders so far as not treated in 
this work, consult ADB under their names. 

bishopric in Westphalia, originally comprising the 
Saxon territory between the Lippe and the Ems, 
bounded on the south by the diocese of Cologne 
and on the west by that of Utrecht. It is probable 
that the first missionary work here was done by 
clerics from the latter diocese, for when it was 
organized as a separate bishopric Chariemagne 
appointed a Frisian priest, Liudger (q.v.), as its 
first bishop. The exact date can not be determined ; 
Liudger (q.v.) was still an abbot on Jan. 13, 802, 
and is designated as a bishop on Apr. 23, 805. 
The fact of his Frisian origin brought about the 
inclusion in his jurisdiction of five Frisian districts 




to the north of the Lippe, extending down to the 
mouth of the Ems. (A. Hauck.) 

F(v the first two centuries after the foundation 
oi the see, the population of Westphalia was scanty 
and exclusively agricultural. Towns grew up first 
around the monasteries which Liudger founded in 
connection with the episcopal sees, as is witnessed 
by the name of MUnster, which supplanted the 
old name MimigemsBford, Mimigardevord. The 
high position assigned by Charlemagne to the Saxon 
bishoprics placed temporal jurisdiction in the bish- 
ops' hands from the beginning. In the twelfth 
century this was increased by rich donations, and 
after the death of Duke Henry the Lion in 1180 
Bishop Hermann II., Count of Katzenelnbogen 
(1174-1203), assumed the ducal powers in his 
diocese. His successors exercised similar rights, 
recognizing only the emperor as their overlord in 
temporal matters. These rights were stubbornly 
contested in the Frisian part of the diocese, and 
not fully acknowledged until 1276. In the thir- 
teenth century the chapter held the position of 
first estate of the diocese, the nobility taking the 
second, and the towns, under the leadership of 
Monster, the third. But the two latter strove in- 
cessantly to increase their power, even by force 
of arms. Otto IV., Count of Hoya (1392-1404), 
established firmly the power which the bishopric 
long enjoyed in Westphalia. The introduction of 
the Reformation teachings in 1524 was supported 
by the independent spirit of the populace, and the 
town became a center of Anabaptist disturbances 
(see Monster, Anabaptists in). But with the 
election of Ernest, elector of Bavaria and 
archbishop of Cologne (1585-1612), the conflict 
was decided in favor of the predominance of 
the Roman Catholic religion, although the extent 
of the diocese was notably diminished during 
the sixteenth century. The ecclesiastical bounda- 
ries of the diocese were enlarged by the bull De 
mluie animarum in 1821, and it now consists of 
366 parishes, with a Roman Catholic population 
of nearly a million. For a list of the bishops 809- 
1522 cf . Hauck-Herzog, RE, xiii. 538-^39. 

Bibuogkapbt: Sources are: R. Wilmans and F. Philippi. 
KaUervHtunden der . . . WeMfalen, 2 vols., M Ouster, 
1867-4)1; Reaetta historia Wettfalim, ed. H. A. Erhard, 
2 vob., ib. 1847-51: WeatfiUisches Urkundenbuch, vol. 
iii.. cd. R. Wflmans, ib. 1871; Die OeKhichtaqudUn de» 
Buiumg Miifuier, ib. 1851 sqq., Rettberg, KD, ii. 424; 
A. TihiR. GrnndungngeachichU der Stifter . . . dee aUen 
Biduma MUfuter, ib. 1867; A. Calmet, Hiel. de Vabhaye 
de M&naUr, Colimar. 1882; Hauck, KD, ii. 406-407; 
It Stapfer, Die HUeete Agende dee Bietume Manetert Mon- 
ster, 1905. 

KARL HEHIRICH: Danish bishop; b. at Gotha, 
Saxe-Coburg, Germany, Oct. 14, 1761 ; d. at Copen- 
hagen Apr. 9, 1830. He studied philology and 
theology at the University of Copenhagen, and 
church history at Gdttingen. He was appointed 
professor of theology at the University of Copen- 
ha^n, 1787, in 1808 succeeding to the bishopric 
of Zealand. Miinter was a prolific writer, and 
several of his works pertaining to church history 
are stiii of value. His principal works are a hand- 
hook on the history of the doctrinal theology of 
the oldest Christian church (2 vols., Copenhagen, 

1801-4); a history of the Danish Reformation 
(2 vols., 1802); an exposition of the religion 
of the Carthaginians (1816; 2d ed., 1821); and 
a church history of Denmark and Norway (3 vols., 
1823-33). Of great importance were also his 
" Symbols and Art-Notions of the Ancient Chris- 
tians " (2 vols., 1825) ; and Primardia ecclence 
AfricancB (1829), which for a long time was the 
principal guide for students of the oldest history 
of the African church. As a theologian Miinter was 
distinctly a historian, not a systematist. He had 
no firm theological or philosophical standpoint, 
but was always an ardent advocate of peace. He 
believed in the "divinity of Christianity," but his 
theology was leavened with rationalism. As a 
teacher he was successful only with those who shared 
his interest for archeology. (F. NiEi^jENf.) 

Bibuoorapht: J. P. Myiwter, in TSK, vi (1833); B. Mttn- 
ter, Familien MUnUra Stamtavle, Copenhagen, 1901. 

MUENZER, mttnt'ser, THOMAS. 

His Youth (i 1). 

Activities at Zwickau (( 2). 

In Bohemia. Works upon the Liturigy (§3). 

Revolutionary Teaching in Alstedt (§4). 

Ebcpulsion from Alstedt and MOhlhauson (S 5). 

Events Leading to the Peasants' War (§6). 

Thomas Muenzer, a prominent enthusiast of the 
time of the Reformation and a leader in the Peas- 
ants' War (q.v.), was bom at Stolberg in the 
Harz Mountains (50 m. s.e. of Brunswick), before 
1490; beheaded at MUhlhausen in Saxony (29 m. 
n.w. of Erfurt) May 27, 1525. Of his youth only 
a few incidents are known. In 1506 he entered the 
University of Leipsic, and in 1512 he 
I. His was a student in the University of 
Youth. Frankfort. In the first half of 1513 
he was engaged in Halle in a league 
against Archbishop Ernst of Magdeburg; in 1515 
he was provost in Frohse near Aschcrsleben, after 
which he seems to have led a wandering life for 
several years. In the beginning of 1519 he was at 
Leipsic, where he still lived at the time of the dis- 
putation. He seems to have made a good impres- 
sion upon Luther, as the latter recommended him 
to Johann Silvanus of Eger (Egranus), at that time 
preacher in Zwickau. At the end of 1519 he was 
confessor of the Bemardine nuns in the monastery 
of Beutitz near Weissenfels. But he found it 
impossible to stay in one place for any length of 
time, and at Beutitz was soon involved in difficulties. 
He evidently had no serious conception of his 
duties, as appears from a statement of Luther to 
the effect that he often omitted the formula for 
the transformation of the elements in the admin- 
istration of the Lord's Supper. It is hardly to be 
assumed that he ever acknowledged the authority 
of the Wittenberg circle, considering his independ- 
ent nature; but the new movement had seized him, 
as appears from his study of Euscbius, Jerome, 
Augustine, and of the acts of the Councils of Con- 
stance and Basel. The study of the Theologia Ger- 
manica (q.v.) recommended by Luther, and of the 
works of Tauler and other mystics exercised a not 
inconsiderable influence upon him. 

With the approval of I^uther he followed in 1520 
a call to Zwickau where Egranus had introduced 



the Reformation and had become involved in dis- 
putes ^ith the monks. During a temporary absence 
of Egranus, Munzer became his substitute as 
first preacher of the principal church 
2. Activities in Zwickau. His first sermons be- 
at Zwickau, trayed his radical tendencies through 
his vehement attacks on the pastoral 
activity of the monks, whom he accused of avarice 
and deceitfulness, securing thereby the favor of the 
citizens who disliked the mendicant friars because 
of their wealth. The town council did not listen 
to the complaints of the Roman Catholics, but re- 
({uested Duke John to prohibit any molestation of 
the preachers of the Gospel. Munzer became more 
and more aggressive especially after his removal 
to the church of St. Catharine, on the return of 
Egranus. He reviled all who contradicted him, 
and caused them to be suspected as opponents of 
the Gospel. Two principles from this time directed 
his actions; first, the appeal to the immediate in- 
spiration of the Spirit as guiding speech and action; 
secondly, the tendency to organize a communion 
of saints filled with the spirit. He aroused the lay- 
men against his spiritual colleagues, gathered the 
elect into conventicles, and asked them to appoint 
twelve apostles and seventy-two disciples out of 
their number. '* The laymen must become our 
prelates and pastors," he announced, and it was 
especially Nikolaus Storch, a cloth-weaver, whom 
he praised as one versed in the Bible, to whom he 
gave the testimony of possessing the spirit. In this 
way he naturally came into diflficulties with his 
colleagues in the city, especially with Egranus, and 
he incited the people to their removal by force. 
On Apr. 16 he was deposed, and with Marcus Thomae 
turned to Prague in order to establish his spiritual 
church among the Utraquists. 

Here he preached in different churches in Ger- 
man and Latin and found adherents among the no- 
bility, but his wild invectives against the clergy 
made it imFK)ssible for him to stay. 
3. In He wandered from place to place, al- 
Bohemia. ways announcing his spiritual gospel 
Works upon by pointing to the near advent of the 
the Liturgy. Antichrist. In spite of his later de- 
nial, he must have had in 1522 a con- 
versation with Luther in which vehement words 
were exchanged. From Nordhausen, where he so- 
journed at least at the end of that year, he came 
immediately before Easter, 1523, to Alstedt and 
was accepted by the council on trial as preacher of 
the Church of St. John. Here he began immedi- 
ately those reforms of the church service know^n 
chiefly from his three liturgical w^orks: DetUsch 
kirchen ampt. Vorordnet, aufzuheben den hirUerlis- 
tigen Deckel, urUcr welchem das lieehi der Welt 
vorhalten war . . . (Alstedt, n.d.); Deutsch evan- 
geliach Mesae, etwann durch die bepstischen pfaffen 
im laiein zu grossem nachteil des christenglaubens 
voT ein apfer gehandelt (Alstedt, 1524); Ordnung 
und berechnunge des teutschen ampts zu Alstadt 
durch Tornam Miinizer, seelwarters in vorgangen 
osteren aufgerichi (Alstedt, 1524). Although in com- 
parison with other utterances these works show 
a certain moderation, they nevertheless betray his 
characteristic tendency. In the first two works 

he laid especial stress upon the song service; the 
whole litui^, with the exception of the coUeets 
and lessons, according to him, should be sung. His 
third work gives an account of the arrangement of 
the church service as it still existed in 1523 and 
explains in an interesting and original manner the 
individual parts of the church service. All three 
worics reveal his artistic sense, ecclesiastical taste, 
high endowments, and comprehensive knowledgje, 
and they possess a high degree of originality; they 
reveal also the purpose to build up and not to tear 
down. Nevertheless the increasing disfavor of 
Luther may be easily explained. He was offended 
by the strong emphasis laid upon the Spirit^ still 
more by the low estimate placed on the sermon and 
by the polemical attitude against the Wittenberg 
circle and the formality of the church service. 
M (Inzer's inflammatory speeches induced Count 
Ernst of Mansfeld to prohibit attendance upon 
M (Inzer's services. Milnzer vidently attacked and 
reviled the count, and in a letter addressed to the 
elector on Oct. 4, 1523, he offered himself to be 
tried according to divine right, but the elector was 
satisfied with the promise of Mdnaier to desist in 
the future from utterances in the pulpit which were 
not profitable for the instruction of the people. 
Thus MQnzer had gained his point, and without 
hindrance continued his insurrectionary sermons. 

In the beginning of 1524 he issued ProiestaHon 
Oder empictung Tome MUnUers von Stdberg am 
Harizs sediDorUra zu Alstedt seine leren betreffende 
vnnd tzum anfang von dem rechten Christen glawben, 
vnnd der Tawffe, which was soon followed by 
Von dem getichten glawben auff nechst 

4. Revolu- Protestation aussgangen Tome Munt- 
tionaxy zers Sdwerters zu Alstedt. The former 

Teaching publication, in which he assumed the 

in Alstedt manner of an apostle or prophet, was 
an attack on the doctrine of the Wit- 
tenberg theologians, although Luther himself is not 
mentioned. It aims to refute the doctrine of in- 
fant baptism on the ground that Christ did not 
baptize children, and that there is no evidence of 
the baptism of Mary or of the disciples. He con- 
cludes that baptism is not properiy understood, 
and that its use in Christianity has become a 
" bestial apish play." The principal point, ac- 
cording to him, centers in immediate inspiration by 
the Spirit of God. He declares also against the 
authority of the Scripture. The doctore of the 
Bible, he says, have no other faith or spirit than 
that which they have stolen from Scripture; but 
that is not the right kind of faith; this must be 
taught immediately by God, man must wait until 
he attains it by the woric of God, otherwise it is 
worth nothing. In spite of its obscurity, MOnzer's 
doctrine found great acclamation. From all sides 
people flocked to hear the sermons of the great 
prophet. He gathered his " elect " into leagues, 
appealing to II Chron. xxiii. 16; strangere were 
also welcomed, and in one day he received about 300 
converts. His evident purpose was the violent sup- 
pression of everjrthing that according to his opin- 
ion contradicted the Gospel. In the spring of 1524 
citizens of Alstedt stormed the near-by chapel of 
Mallerbach to which pilgrims used to resort, and 



earned away its treasureB, sinoe MOnzer preached 
open rebdlion against the princes. It is evident 
that MOnser had been seised by the idea, then dom- 
inating wide circleSy of a great revolution to come 
in the year 1524, and he felt himself called upon to 
assist in its fulfilment. When a member of the 
eouncfl was arrested on account of his participa- 
tion in the attack at the chapel, he ordered the 
alam^b^ to be rung, and immediately an armed 
mob arose; even women seized pitchforks in order 
to protect their council and preachers against pos- 
siUe attack. Nevertheless, the princes found no 
way to intervene. At the same time MOnzer's in- 
vectives against the Wittenberg Reformers became 
more violent, eq)ecially against Luther's doctrine 
of Scripture. When the people of Sangerhausen 
were fovbidden by the authorities to attend his ser- 
mons, he preached rebellion against the tyrants, 
and in fearful threatenings denounced the princes. 
On July 13, 1524, Elector Friedrich and Duke 
Johann came to Alstedt and permitted MUnzer to 
deliver before them a sermon in which in vehement 
terms he demanded the use of force against the 
godless and those that practised idolatry: '' The 
vicious laaty Christians must be eradicated if the 
princes are not willing to do it " (Ausalegung dea 
amiem vnienehyda Damdia, etc., Alstedt, 1524). 
Duke Jdbann on this occasion pledged him to 
subject his writings to the censor, but the other 
proposal to be tried" before the Wittenberg circle 
Manser indignantly rejected and yet remained 
unmolested. The excitement increased on hearing 
that people who had fled from Sangerhausen for the 
sake of the Gospel and others who had attended 
the sermons of MOnser and were captured were to 
be delivered to the authorities. Thereupon Mtinzer 
preached on July 24 that sword must be met by 
sword, and his following was convinced that no 
harm could come to them if a struggle should 

In the mean time Luther had seen the sermon 
preached before the princes and at the end of July 
wrote his famous Sendbrief an den FUrsten zu 
Sadiaen vom aufruhreriachen Geist in which he in- 
structed the authorities in their duties in regard to 
the rebellion. Consequently MOnzer was tried on 
Aug. 1 before Duke Johaxm and his councilors at 
Weimar. Although he denied many 
S Bzpolsion things, he was convicted of rebellious 
from Alstedt actions and dismissed until the elector 
and should dispose of him further. MQnzer 
Mflhnumsen.then offered himself to be tried for the 
purpose of defending his doctrine 
against the " mendacious Luther " before the Chris- 
tianity of all nations. He did not wait for the elec- 
tOT's answer, but after his return to Alstedt the 
council opposed him, and he secretly left the city 
on Aug. 7. Shortly before that he had written a 
new woric, AussgetrUckte empldasung des falschen 
Glaubens der vngetrewen weU, durchs gezettgnU des 
Enangelions Luce, etc., which offers the best insight 
into his doctrine. From Alstedt Mttnzer went to 
Muhlhausen. In this small but industrious imperial 
city Evangelical preachers had been active for 
some time, among them Heinrich Pfeiffer, a native 
of Mohlhausen and formerly a monk in the monas- 


tery of Reiffenstein in the Eichsfeld, a man gifted 
with great energy and stirring eloquence. His ser- 
mons and those of his associates, being directed 
more against the hated priests and monks than 
toward the preaching of the Gospel, fell upon fertile 
soil, since the people were dissatisfied with the 
avaricious and immoral life of the clergy and the 
autocratic and arbitrary rule of the council. The 
priests' houses were despoiled, and after an insur- 
rection the council was compelled to admit partici- 
pation in the government by the citizens. Never- 
theless, toward the end of Aug., 1523, Pfeiffer and 
his associates were banished from the city. Toward 
the end of the year Pfeiffer was again in Mohlhausen 
and found many adherents, and although these 
entered the church about Easter, 1524, and broke 
the images, the council did not dare to interiere 
and was satisfied with the prohibition to shelter 
the preacher. In this town MUnzer expected to 
find what he sought. A warning letter from Luther, 
dated Aug. 21, 1524, and addressed to the coun- 
cil, arrived too late. At first people hesitated to 
allow MOnzer to preach, but finally they consented. 
He entered into the closest connection with Pfeiffer, 
and more and more the opponents of the old gov- 
ernment of the city united with the religious inno- 
vators. Churches and monasteries were ravaged, 
pictiu'es removed, relics torn out and disfigured. 
The preachers surrounded themselves with armed 
mobs. Mtinzer instructed the people that they 
were not obliged to obey the authorities and with- 
out compromise announced the duty to persecute 
and expel all not following the spiritual life. The 
tumult increased in such a way that a ntunber of 
councilors escaped their responsibility by flight. 
For the radicals the time seemed to have arrived 
to obtain their demands. Mtinzer and Pfeiffer 
issued twelve articles in which was urged the depo- 
sition of the old council and the installation of a 
new council that should order and judge according 
to the Word of God. The articles were distributed 
in the neighboring villages, but did not find a 
favorable reception, and the council once more 
succeeded in gaining the upper hand, whereupon 
Mtinzer and Pfeiffer were expeUed on Sept. 28, 

Both turned to the South and reappeared in 
Nuremberg, where Mtinzer found a printer for his 
lampoon on Luther with which he intended to 
avenge himself for his expulsion from Saxoi\y, Uoch 
veruraachle Schutzrede und Antwort tvider das geist- 
lose, sanfUebende Fleisch zu WiUen- 
6. Events berg welches mil verkehrter Weise darch 
Leading to den Diebstahl der heUigen Schrift die 
ihtPtaaantB* erbdmUiche Christenheit also ganz jdmr- 
War. merlich besudeU hat. Before the coun- 
cil of Nuremberg was aware, he had 
disappeared. He traveled south, and his works on 
baptism and faith as well as his inimical attitude 
to Luther liad directed the attention to him even 
in Ztirich in the circle of the Anabaptists. In Gries- 
sen, a little village between Waldshut and Schaff- 
hausen, he became personally acquainted with the 
Ztirich Friends; and their communistic tendencies 
have not without reason been traced to Miinzer's 
influence. In places like Klettgau and Hegau, 


■where all was already in a state of ferroent, he de- 
livered inflammatory speeches, and by them as 
well as by his writiags he unsettled the conditioos 
more and more. Mlinier longed to be back at 
Muhlboiuen, where his wife had remained, but did 
not return at the earliest before the beginning of 
1525. Pfeiffer hud meaawbile returned and had 
renewed his inflammatory course of action. They 
both preached openly on the necessity of rebellion, 
Pfeiffer taking the leading port, since he was the 
very man to transform Mtlnaer's theories into actu- 
»Iily. The communistic element became more 
prominent and the number of radicals increased. 
At the same time warlike preparations were made 
and men were drilled as soldiers. On Klar. 16 the 
council was deposed under the leadership of Pfeiffer, 
and a new council was instituted upon tfie princi- 
ples establishnt by the preachers. MUnzer held the 
great mass of the people, but his influence was still 
greater in Thuringia and in the Uari Mountains, 
where he incited the people by letters and by the 
formation of leagues. The inevitable consequences 
of Milnzer'a agitation now appeared. From the 
South the peasants' movement approached and 
spread over the whole of Thuringia, the Eichsfeld 
and the Horz regions. The spiritual center was 
Milhlhausen with its preachers, though Milnzer 
did not appear as the real leader. People were not 
willing to follow him blindly, and there were also 
disagreements with Pfeiffer which hindered a uni- 
form advance. While Pfciffer's marauding expe- 
ditions into the Eiehsfeld occupied a part of tlie 
insurgent forces and carried everywhere devasta- 
tion and destruction, Philipp of Hesse approached 
after defeating the peasants around Hcrsfeld and 
Fulda, and at the same time the peasants who had 
gathered in the neighborhood of Frankenhausen 
were threatened by Duke Georg and especially by 
Count Ernst of Mansfvld. On May 10 Miinzer came 
to their assistance, and immediately broke off the 
negotiations that had been entered upon with 
Count Albrecht of Mansfeld. In the face of the 
Buperior power of the princes the peasants again 
entered upon new negotiations, but by false news 
of vict^rica from outside, by his eloi[Ucnce and 
trtiat in victory, and by his reference to signs sup- 
posed to be given him by God, the prophet once 
more succeeded in deluding the hesitating people. 
The bloody battle of Frankenhausen on May 15 
decided the issue. On the following day Mttnzer 
was captured and delivered into the bands of Count 
Ernst of Mansfeld at Heldrungen, was placed under 
torture, and Georg of Saxony and Philipp of Hesse 
took pains to convert him. After the surrender of 
Milhlhausen Monger was led there and put to death 
together with Pfeiffer. (T, Kolde.) 

BlBuoaBiPHT! A " Rbtnry of MUnier" printed st Bb«b- 
onu, l.'i2.'i. uid lepniduced in Walch't ed. oi Luther's 
Worka. xvi. 159 aqq., in oncrlbtxl In MelanphthoD. Con. 
BUlt: (I. T. StiDbel. Lrbm, Sehnflm utul Uhrm ThnmS 
MBiilim, VurpimbMi. 1791; J. K. Seidpmnnn. Thomat 
Jtfunwr. Diwiien. 1M42: K. E. FSrstcmann, \r«r. L'r- 
kundriAurh lur GrKhicMr ilrr rmimrtiirhrn Kirrkmnfar- 
moKoa. i. 22K. Ilnmlnini. IH42; O. Men. Tkomat Manirr 
unit HriHnrh Vfrifftr I6.1.t-SB, fiflttinuMi, IKK9: A. H. 
Newmnn, tlial. of AnH-1'rJ.iliaiilim. pp. HT-NA, PhiJndcl- 
phin, ISO?; K. KiuUky, rammniiUnj in C'lRlroJ Europe 
in the Timt tf iAt Itifarmcuian, pp. 90-154. LouUcm, 1397 

(aympatJiclic juid npotofietit) ; H. E. Jaoob*. Afarti* Lu- 
Ihrr. pp. 253 sqq. et psnim. Na« Vark. 1S9S: R. Jonlui, 
Chronik drr Sladt MalhauKn, vol. i., Muliltuusen. 1«»; 
idem. 2ur Garhirhte drr SUuU Mohthatam. pwtB L-ii., 
ib. 1901-02: E. SaUiug. Dit amiv^itrJitn Kirthmnrd- 
nunffm dr> 16. JahrhumleHt. i. 470 nqq.. Ldpaie. 1B02; 
H. C. Vedder, BatlkoKiT HabtruiirT. pp. 97, 105-107. leO. 
102. New York. 1905; H. Barge. Andreat BodmMtm ton 

' ~ chvt*. 

HDEZZIH, mii-«z'zin {MnEDDIIT}: The official 

attached Ui a Mohammedan mosque, whose bun- 
neas it is to chant tiie aian (from which the word 
muezzin is formed with the aid of the preformative), 
or coll of the faithful to prayer, five times each day. 
The call is sounded from the minaret, if the mosque 
has one, otherwise from the side of the moeque. 
The words of the call are: " Allah is most great 
(four times); I testify that there is no God but 
Allah (twice); I testify that Mohammed is tlie 
apostle of Allah (twice); come to prayer (twice); 
come t^ salvation (twice); Allah is most great 
(twice); there is no god but Allah." In the early 
morning call, uftcr the words " Come to salvation," 
the Muezzin adds " Prayer is better than sleep " 

HUFTI: The title of an official in Moham- 
medan, parliculariy Turkish, countries, whose du^ 
it is to assist the judge or cadi by expounding the 
law. He must be familiar with the Koran, with 
the body of Mohammedan tradition, as well as with 
the works on law, as it is part of his work to cil« 
decisions already made in sinular coses. 
BlHi.tnaRiPHT: D. D. Micdonald. DeetiaprntrU of MuHm 

ThfoLiou^ Jufvprwleruie, and CoytMiluiional Thrtrrj/. pp. 

115. 1M4. 278. 277, New York. 1903. 


English sectarian and the followers of him and 
John Reeve (1608-^); b. in Walnut Tree Yard, 
off Bishopsgata Street Without, London, July, 
1609; d. at London Mar. 14, 1698. Apprenticed 
as a tailor, he went as a journeyman to his cousin 
John Reeve (1608-58) in 16;il, who converted him 
to Puritanism, and in 1&47 he withdrew from all 
worship, adopting an agnostic position. In IG.'M 
he was 8ttract<Hi by the declaration of tlie two 
so-called prophets, John Robins, a " rant«r," and 
Thomas Taney, a predecessor of the Anglo-Israel- 
ites, whose crude pantheism took hold of him; at 
the same time ho read Jacob Boehme (((.v.). He 
drew also Reeve to his views. The latt«r in 1652 
professed personal communications, appointing 
him mesaenger and Muggleton mouthpiece of a now 
dispensation; and as the two witnesses (Rev. xL 
3) they set forth as prophets of a new system oF 
faith. They gathered a large following and the sect 
continued till the lust century, Joseph Gauder (d. 
1868) being reported as the last adherent. 

The element of spirituality was contributed by 
Reeve. He <listinguished between faith and reason 
OS respectively the divine and demoniac elements in 
man (the doctrine of two-seeds), and shared with 
the Sociiiians a frank anthropomorphism and a be- 
lief that the mortality of the soul is to be remedied 
by a physirul resurrection. The harder outlines, 
including the rejection of prayer, came from Mug- 
gleton. lliH philosophy is epicurean, holding that 


alter tbe divine being had fixed the muchinery of 
ihe worid and placed a conscience in man, be took 
no further notice of the world until the revelation 
to Reeve. The de\Tl ia s human being, nmralives 
of miracles are moGtly parables, the sun travels 
aiDund the earth, and heaven is ca]culat«d to be 
mx miles off. '" Earth and water were not created, 
but self -originated ; the evil one became incarnate 
in Eve; the Father was the sufferer on the cross, 
having left EUijoh to govern heaven while he came 
m earth to die " (J. H. Blunt, DicUmary of Sedt, 
Beraiai, p. 365, Philadelphia, 1874). In 1S53-54 
Hug^toD and Reeve were tried and imprisoned 
fw denying the Trinity- 

BiwuocaUirat : Gonault the Wortt of Reeve »ad Uuggle- 
loD. td. J. BBd I. Frost. Londoa, 1832: idem, A LM o/ 
Awbr ant Orvral rnda to Rrrri and «iwnlitpn'> Worki, 
A. ISM; A Undt^ Aaim'a of U> Wickid Li/c s/ . . . 
L. M., in Borltian SivKfiiany. voia- t-, viii., Lnodon, 
lSOS-13: r™«ocrto« o/ lA* Liirrpool IMrmry and /"Ail- 
■■oy^ienf S«eiftJi. IfWi-TO. MiteileloD^B AtitobioKnphy ia 
pr^ixcd to his own Artt v/Uir Witnemm, Itwe. 

tant Episcopalian clei^yman, poet, and philan- 
thnqiist; b. in Philadelphia Sept. IG, 17!t6; d. in 
Kew York Apr. 8, 1877. Hie great-grandfather waa 
Beory Hclchior Muhlenberg, his grandfather Fred- 
vick .Augustus Muhlenberg, and hia father Ueury 
William Muhlenbet};, and he was baptiaed in the 
Lutheran communion, but while a little boy made 
cbcnce of the Episcopal Church. He graduated 
tn>m the University of Pennsylvania in 1814, 
and at once entered on his theological sludics 
tmder Bishop White, by whom he was ordained 
deacon in 1S17, and whose Bssistant he became in 
Qirist Church. On Us ordination as priest, 1820, 
he accepted a call to the rectorship of St. James', 
I^acafiter, Pa., where he remained six years, and 
where he did much toward the advancement of 
public education. He occupied himself alao at this 
time in church hymnody; wrote a Pita for Chria- 
&m Hj/ttaia, that was circulated at the special Gen- 
cnl Convention of 1821, and which, with other 
measures, resulted in 1826 in the adoption of a 
eoUectioD dt hjTnns prepared by a committee of 
which be woa the chief worker. His own well-known 
hjrmn, " I would not live alway," was written in 
lancaster in 1824, and first printed in the Phila^ 
delphia Epuropal Rtarrder, in 182(1. He declared 
Ihat a myth had grown up about his famous hymn 
lod Ihat it was not written under the depression 
of a r\q>UiTed engagement of marriage. But, con- 
tiDced that it was too gloomy, he worked it over 
■nd thus enlarged and " evangetiicd " it (cf. the 
publication mentioned below). 

He championed the Christianizing of education, 
the union, in some practical form, of the Evangel- 
ical bodies of Christendom, and Christian brother- 
hood a« esemplifying itself in institutions of charity 
sod beneficence for the poor and oppressed. On 
leaving Lancroster in 1826, he became rector of St. 
Okoj^'b, Flushing, L. I., N. Y., and there opened 
1 vfaool in 1S2S, when he relinquished his charge, 
hi I83S he joineil Uie school to St. Paul's College, of 
"hicb he was rector tiU 1846, when he entered on 
the pastorate of the Free Church of the Holy Com- 
oaDion, New Yoric, the buiUing of which wait 

erected by his sister, Mrs. Mary A. Rogers. He was 
the originator of numerous important movements in 
the Episcopal Church (see Deaconess, III., :;, d. \ 
2), and the methods he employed in his schools be- 
came moat popidar, being widely applied in other 
institutions. It was during his ministry in this 
church that he enunciated most emphatically those 
" Evangelical Catholic "principles which he believed 
to be tbe true theory of the Christian Church, and 
which are signally expressed in The Muhlenberg 
Memorial (cf . Evangeliad Catholic Paperi, New York, 
IS75). His grandest exemplifications at Christisn 
brotherhood are tbe institutions of St. Luke's Hos- 
pital, New York, opened in 1850, with himself an itd 
first pastor and superiotendcnt; and the Church 
Village of St, Johnlaiid on Long Isbwd, incorporated 
in 1870. '■ The incomaUon was tbe central idea of 
his theology and the inspiration of his Christian life 
—brotherhood in Christ, brotherhood through 
Christ," He never married, and, though bom to 
alBuence, did not leave money enough for his fuocral- 
He died in St. Luke's Hospital, and was buried at 
St. Johnlaiid, His works embrace / mould not live 
aia-ay, and Other Pieeet (New York, 1S59; reissued 
with The Story o/ the Hymn, and a Brief AccoutU of 
.it. Johnland, 1871); Evangdictd SiMcrhoods; in 
Two Lrtlers to a Friend (18G7); CArisf awl the fliWe; 
not the Bible and Christ (1869); and bis Evani/eliad 
Catholic Papers; Compiled by Anne Ayrcs (1875). 
Bihuookapht: Biapnptiifv hpve been writtea by E. Hat- 
wood nnd G. I>. WiLiics. New York. 1S77; A. AynM. lb. 
laW. new bL, I8»* ((he etanriurd); «iul W. W. Newton, 
Boeloii, ISOO. CciTuuJt aiao E, A, Washburn, fiarmont in 
MrmBTiat ol W. A. MuhlrrU/rrg. New York. 187". 
HUIR, PEARSOK H'ADAH: Church of Scot- 
land; b. at CfWto«Ti (32 m. s.w, of Dumfries), 
Kirkcudbrigbtehire, Jan. 26, 1846. He was edu- 
cated at the I'nivcreity of GIo^ow, after which he 
was minister at Catrine, Ayrshire (1870-72), Pol- 
mont, Stirlingshire (1872-80), Momingsidc, Edin- 
burgh (1S80-U6), and Gla^ow Cathedral (since 
18%); also secretary of the Church Service Society 
(188S-1907), By appointment of the General As- 
sembly he was lecturer on pastoral theology in the 
universities of St. Andrews, Aberdeen, Glasgow, and 
Edinbu^h in 1895-97 and 1902-06. He has written 
Samuel Rviher/ord (St. Giles Lectures on Scottish 
Divines; Edinburgh, 1882): The Ckureh of Seot- 
larul: A SJtrifA o/Os HWory (1890); Retigioan Wn- 
Icm of Eitglnml (1901); and Modem Subatitulee for 
CArtstianily (Baird lecture; 1909); and contribul^l 
the section on the monuments and inscriptions in 
CliisKDw Cnthedrnl to G, E, Todd's Book of Glasgow 
CnUiedml, 1898), 

HULBBRG, JOHAHNES; Dominican monk and 
aniicipdicir of the Reformation; b. at Klein-Basel 
in the middle of the fourteenth century; d. in Maul- 
bronn in 1414. He was the son of u cobbler and de- 
voted himself upto hia twentieth yearly his father's 
handicraft. He then first attended school and won 
afterward entered (he Dominican order. With fer- 
vent zeal he participated in the efforts for the 
reformation of his order and won nuiny cloisters tor 
the reform movement, especially in South C'crmany. 
He soon became one of tbe roost siiccessful and 
esteemed public speakers. From 1400 be began, 



in Basel, the struggle Bgainst the 
Bc^uines (q-v.), who found earneet defeadera in the 
Franciscans. I-'rom 1405 to 1411, he sojoumed in 
Italy, and remained, after the Council of Pisa, under 
the obedience of Gregory XII. When he returned 
to Basel in 1411, he sharply assailed the moral 
■horteonuDgs or the clergy in his sermons and, in 
a prophetic vein, announced U) them a great judg- 
ment. Driven from Basel aa a schismatic and here- 
tic, he died, widely revered aa a god-sent prophet. 
Among his works, the controversial writings against 
the Beguines are noteworthy; these have been pub- 
lished in part by Haupt (ZKQ, x. 511 sqq., l(tU6; 
ct. J. L. von Mosheim, De Beghardit, pp. 554 sqq., 
Leip^, 1T90). H. Haupt. 

Bibuikiiupht: C. WunUaen. Bather Chmmct. pp. 301- 
220. Duel. ISHO: P. Oshi. GfKkichU dcr .'iladi . . . Bold, 
iii. 2ft-36. ib, 1819; J. F. Ilauti, OaidiirMi: drr Univrrti- 
tat Beiddbm. i. 240-241, 11. 3ft4 *qq.. Mumheim. 1S63~ 
1804: K. Scbider. Uaailer Johanna Sider. pp. 13. IM 
w|q,. Muni, ISSfi; Reichert, in R.miuehe Q-uartaUdiriH 
for AUmwonkimSi, liv (1900). 84. 95. iv (1901), 128- 
129, 139. 148. 

MULE; The hybrid of the a.ia and the nmre, 
in contrast with the hinny, the offspring of tlie 
Btollion and the sho-ass. The muie, on account of 
its sure-footed nesH, is more serviceable than the 
horse in mountainous regions, though inferior both 
in size and strength. Mutes are mentioned in the 
Egyptian and Assyrian records, as well as in Homer. 
According to the latter, they were derived princi- 
pally from Mysia and Paphlagonia (Iliad, xxiv.). 
The Hebrews obtained these animals from Togar- 
Biah (Armenia), which was rich in horses, through 
the Pheniciana (Esek. xxvii, 14), They were also 
imported into Aa^ria. Among the Hebrews they 
are first named in David's time aa saddle animals 
of the kings and princes (It Sam. xiii. 29; J Kings 
f. 33), and as beasts of burden (I Chron. xii. 40). 
It is evident that at this period they were some- 
what rare; only later did their wie become more 
general (I Kings xviii. 5; Zech. xiv. 15). They were 
Bent to Solomon as tribute from conquered peoples 
(I Kings K. 25; 11 Chron. ix. 24). Whether the 
Hebrews themselves raised these animals in ancient 
times is not known; in the lat«r legislation (Lev. 
xix. 19) this is forbidden. The law was, however, 
evaded by breeding the animals outside the land. 
Sennacherib carried off a great number of mules, 
BBsea, and horses as booty (according to the inscrip- 
tion on the famous cylinder of this king, iil. IS sqq.); 
the returning exiles brought back a considerable 
number of mules with them, although the number 
of horses was three times as great (Ezra ii. 66; Neh. 
vii. CS). I. Benzinorr. 

BlBUoaRAPHT: V. Hehn, KvUinvJIaitn und S'awUifl'^, 

cd. U. Srhrsder, Berlin. 1902: F. Viitouroui. OWwBMire 

de la Bible, (um. xxtHii., cols. I3.1S-133S, Parig, 1906; 

DB. lii. 456: EB, ili. 3224-25; JS. ix. la^. 

HnLFORD. ELISHA: Episcopalian; b. at 
Montrose, Susquehanna County, Pa., Nov. 19, 1833; 
d. at Cambridge, Mass., Dec. 9, 1«S.^, He grail- 
uatfd from Yale College 1SB5: studied theology 
At I'nion Theological Seminary, New York, at 
Andover, Mass., and in Hullc and Heidelberg, Ger- 
niany; woe ordained deacon IK.')9, and priest IR62; 
bad charges at Darien, Conn , I8GI ; South Orange, 

N. J-, 1861-S4; FriendsviUe, Penn., 1877-81. From 
ISG4 to 1877 he resided without charge at Mont- 
rose, Pa.; after 1881 he lived at Cambridge, where 
he lectured on apologetics in the Episcopal Divinity 
School. Dr. Mulford was in sj'mpathy with the 
theological sentiments expressed by the schotd of 
Coleridge and Frederick Deniaon Maurice, and stood 
for the union of the utmost liberty of pbiloeophie 
thought in Uic treatment of Chriatian dogmas. He 
was also under the influence of Richard Rothe, and 
was in accord with the realism of Hegel. He viote 
The Nation, the FoundalUm of Civil Order and Po- 
litical Life in the United SCatet (New York, 1870, and 
often); and The Republic, of God, an InxHtuU of 
Theology (Boston, 1881, and often). 

MULLENS, JOSEPH: English Congregational- 

ist missionary; b. in London Sept. 2, 1820; d. at 
Chacombc, near Mpwapwa (200 m. w. of Zaniibar), 
German East Africa, July 10, 1879. He graduated 
from London Univeraity in 1841; in 1842 he offered 
liimself to the London Missionaiy Society, and, after 
beini; oMained, sailed for India, where he began 
worK at Bbowanipore, and was pastor of the native 
church there, 1846-58. While there he gathered 
statistics of the missions in India and Ceylon. Re- 
turning to England in 1858, he was prominent as 
secretary of the Liverpool Missionary Conference 
in 1800; in 1865 he became joint foreign secretary 
and in 18I>S sole foreign secretary of the LtHidon 
Missionary Society; in 1870 he was present at the 
annual meeting of the American Boonl of Com- 
missioners for Foreign Miasiona; and he apent the 
year of 1873 in a visit to Madagascar in the int«reet 
of misaionaiy work. He waa acUve in securing the 
convention of the Mildmay Conference, London, 
1878. His last great desire was to eatablish on a 
permanent baws the missions of the London Society 
in Ujiji, Africa, and in this interest he accompanied 
several missionaries to Africa. Starting from Zan- 
zibar he got no farlher than Mpwapwa. Hia Btat«»- 
manlike and administrative abilities enabled him to 
perform wonders tor the efficiency of the l.,ondoa 
Missionary Society. His writings embrace VetJoit- 
tism, Brakminiam, and Christianity Examined and 
Compared. A Priie E»»ay (Calcutta, 1852); Mia- 
siona in South India Viaiieii and Dfacribed (London, 
1854); The Religioua Atperta of Hindu Phitosophj/ 
Staled and Diwusscd. A Prize Emay (1860); A 
Brief Ret^ew of Ten Years' Mistionary Labor in 
India between 18SS and 1861. Prepared from Local 
Reports and OrigiruU Letters (1863); London and 
Calcutta Compared in their Hcathcni*m, their Privi- 
leges and their Prospects (1868); and Tioehv Months 
in Madagascar (1875). 

BmiJoaiLAFHi: DNB. ixiii. 276-277; London UUnonart 
Hodtty ChnmMe. Oct.. 1879. 


eilucation at the Agricultural and Mechanical Col- 
Ipge of Texas (1876-79), the Southern Baptist Theo- 
logical Seminary (graduated 1885), and at Johns 
?Iopkina I'liivcrstty, Baltimore, Md.; was pastor at 
Harrodaburg, Ky. (1885-88), of the Lee Street Bop- 
list Church, Baltimore (1888-95); corresponding 
secretary of the Foreign Mission Board of the South- 



era Baptkt Convention (1S95-96); pastor of the 
First Church, Newton, Mass. (1896-99); baa been 
pRoident of the Southern Baptist Theolo^iil Scm- 
inaiy and professor of theology anee 1899; and is 
president of the Baptist Youiig People's I'niun of 
America. He is the author of Why U ChrialianUy 
True f (Chicago, 1905); and Axioms of Rdigian: a 
New IjiUrprttalion o/ihe Baptitl Faith (Philadelphia, 
MDLOT, mii'ao', RENE, MULOTISTS. See Holt 


gregationalist; b. at Bainbrtdge, N. Y., Mar. 5, 
1830; d. at New Haven Jan. U, 1910. He waa 
graduated from Yale Coil^e (A.B., 1851) and Yale 
Divinity School (1855), aft«r which he held paslor- 
ilea &t Don:beat«r, Mass. (1856-60), Havcrlull, 
Hub. (1862-70), Lawrence, Mass. (1870-75), San 
Joi«, Cal. (1875-76). North Adams, Mass. (1876- 
1SS5), and the United Church, New Haven, Conu. 
(&ft«rlSS5; after 1891 paator emeritus). He wrote: 
On Vie Threshold (Boston, 1881); The Freedom of 
F(nU(18S3); Lampg and Paiha {1885); The ApjKat 
10 Life (1887); Character ikrougk Inspiration (New 
Yoii, 1897); Horace BushneU, Preaclier and Theo- 
logian (Boston, 1899); and Esiaysfor the Day (ISMM). 
HDBGO, SAIHT. See KeNTloeBN, Saikt. 
MDWIIU, SAIHT. See Finta-v, Saint. 
nO: Italian Roman Catholic historian; b. at Vig- 
nola (50 m. n.n.w. of Florence) Oct. 21, 1672; d. 
at Modena Jan. 23, 1750. He studied theology, 
pbiioaophy, and law at Modena, and in 1605 was ut- 
tarhed to the Ambrodon Library at Milan. In 1700 
be waa recalled to Modena aa archivist and libra- 
rian, where be spent the remainder of his Ufe, being 
also provost of Santa Uaria della Fomposa. The 
leeulta o( his activity at Milan were hia Anccdota ex 
Ambrotianit bibliothcciE codicibus (4 vols., Milan and 
Padua, 1697-1713) and A-necdola Graca (Padua, 
1709). Het« he discovered the famous Muratorian 
Canon (q.v.). The controverfy which broke out in 
1708 between the emperor and the pope over the 
etate aod territory of Comacchio, in which Muruton 
waa called to defend the house of E^te against the 
papal claims, led to his first greot historical work, 
the AntidtiJd Estenai ed Italiane (2 vols., Modena, 
1717-10). He then proceeded to an exhaustive 
eoUection of material for a history of Italy from 
the 6fth to the sixteenth centmy. The results were 
his Rentm lUdtcarum acriptorea ab anno 600-1500 
(28 vols., Milan, 1723-51), eupplemented by hia 
Antiqititalea Italics medii am (fl vols., 1738-12; 
Italian transl. by the author, Diaaertazioni topra 
U antiehiid italiane, 3 vols., 175!) and his Noiiia 
Iheiaitrua veterum inaariptionum (4 vols., 1739-13). 
Tlie material thus obtained was summarized in a 
■iiaple deacription of facte in rigid chronological 
order from the beginning of tlie Christian era to 
17^9, the work being entitled Annali d'llalia (12 
toIs., 1744-49). Here, too, belongs hb Lilurgia 

Somana rWus Iria aacrameidaTia compUctena (1748). 
The remaining works of Muratori, many of them 

imr jfF [Mun iiion vma, were devoted either to literature, 

philosophy, jurisprudence, or theology. To the 
firat claaa belong bis Delia perfeita poena italiana 
(2 vols., 1706) and RejUiseioni aopra il buon guito 
inlomo U mricme e le arli (1708); to the second hia 
Delia CaritJi criitiana (1723), FUosofia morale ea~ 
poela (1735), Delle forze ilrll'intrndimcnto umano 
(1745), and Delia fona della fantasia (1745); and 
to the third his Gooemo della petle poliliro, medico 
ed cceleaiasiieo (1714), Deftlii della giuriapT^enxa 
(nil), and Delia pubUieafelialHn49). His the- 
ological writings roused much controversy, espe- 
cially by his attacks on the Jesuit favoring of vows 
in Sicily to defend the doctrine of the Inunaculat« 
Co[iceptioD even at the risk of life, and by hta 
criticituns of certain ecclesiastical proceedings, par- 
ticularly the ejccea-iive honor of the saints and the 
great number of holidays. To this class belong his 
De ingeniorum modemtione in religionia negolio 
(Paris, 1714; under the pseudonym of t.aniindo 
Pritanio); De supemtilione vita/ida aive censura voH 
aanf/uinarii (1740; under the pseudonym of An- 
tonius Lampridius) ; the pseudonymoua Ferdinandi 
Valdeaii epiatola (1743), and Della regolata diwi- 
tione de' criatianx (1747; under the pseudonym of 
Lamindo Pritanio). The latter class of writings 
exposed Muratori to the attacks of hia enemies and 
rivals. Mura tori's voluminous correspondence, 
hitherto either scattered in various publications or 
still only in manuscript, was edited by M. Campori 
in his Epiatolario di L. A. Muratori (Modena, lilOl 
sqc).). (G. LaUBUAKNt.) 

BiBUOfliuPHi: AMOUnta of hia lifo ware wrillcn by O. F. 
t«oL> HuTBtori. Naples. 17S8; Had by A. Fubroiuua, in 
Vila naiorum, i. 89-381, 18 vols., Piis. 1778-99. Con- 
ftult tuither: A. vod Reumoat. Bfitrtot fur iialisniaeheH 
Gtiel'whU. iii. ■i\&'3.7a. S vola., Derlin. 1S93-S7: M. Uui- 
dau, OttdachlB dur UatUniKhen Ullcrattir, Beriin, 1899. 

MURATORIAH, ma'rfl'to'ri-an, CABOH. 

I. nncriptioa. (hispda bdcI AeU (1 1). 

II. Flaiw. Dute. Bod Author- Piiiilme EpiiUn (t 2). 

■hip. Othel WriUagB [{ 3). 

III. ConMnlii. IV. Ruling Idea*. 

I. Description: The Muratorian Canon is an early 
manuscript fragment of importance for the histoty 
of the New-Testament canon. The manuscript upon 
which until lately knowledge of the content* of this 
canon rested entirely and still rests almost wholly 
is a miscellany carelessly .put together, beginning 
with an excerpt from Eucherius. [This was dis- 
covered by Muratori in the Ambrosinn Library at 
Milan, and published by him in AtUiquilatea llrdica, 
Milan, 1740.) What immediately preceded the 
Canon is unknown, as seven quaternions just be- 
fore its abrupt opening arc lost. After it comes, on 
tlie pftnip leaf, a part of Ambrose on Abraham, 
which ia immediately repeated. This proceeding, 
together with the notable variations between the 
two copies, sufficiently indicates the carelessness of 
the copyist, and shows that the frequent ortho- 
graphical mistakes are his and not those of the 
original author. This ia shown even more clearly 
by the recent discovery of some bita of the Mura- 
torian Canon in four eleventh- or tweifth-century 
Latin manuscripts of Paul's epistles at Mont* Cas- 
sino. The compiler of the prologue in which these 
occur can not have used the Milan manuscript, aa is 




Bhown by many detaib; and the fact that he worked 
from an independent source not only demonstrates 
that the poor Latin of the Milan te?rt is not that of 
the original author, but increases confidence in 
the substantial fidelity of the text as we have it. 
r>ut even after a collation of the newly found ex- 
tracts, there are still questions which can be solved 
only by conjecture. The most important of the 
hypotheses naturally formed is that the fragment 
is a translation of a Greek original. This was early 
suggested by Muratori and S. de Magistris, both of 
whom assigned its original composition to a Greek- 
writing author — the former to Caius of Rome and 
the latter to Papias; and the theory, supported in 
recent days by Hofmann, Tregelles, Westcott, 
Salmon, and Kuhn, is now the prevalent though not 
the universal one. 

n. Place, Date, and Authorship: The designa- 
tion of Rome not only as urbs Roma in 1. 76 but as 
urbt alone in 1. 38 indicates a western origin; and 
BO (assuming the substantial completeness of the 
text) does the fact that James and Hebrews are 
not even mentioned. The circumstantial solem- 
nity with which the position of Pius at the time of 
the writing of the Shepherd of Hennas is described 
is intelligible only if the author was writing, not 
indeed in Rome for Romans, but in or for a western 
church in some way connected with Rome. The 
date rests largely on the sentence already referred 
to (73 sqq.) : " The Pastor [i.e. Shepherd], more- 
over, did Hermas write very recently in our times 
in the city of Rome, while his brother bishop Pius 
sat in the chair of the church of Rome " (ANF, 
V. 604). If the words " very recently," by con- 
trast with the epoch of the prophets and apostles, 
would allow the lapse of a considerable time be- 
tween the writing of the Shepherd and that of this 
document, "in our times" is conclusive for the 
birth of the author before the death of Pius 
(not later than Easter, 154). The author took 
a lively personal interest in the position of the 
Shepherd in public worship; and this was not a 
question of the fourth and fifth centuries, but one 
vigorously discussed in the west about 200. The 
earlier date assigned by some, about 170 or 180, is 
improbable, if only because the wTiter speaks as 
a member of the Catholic Church which has defi- 
nitely cast out not merely the parties of Valen- 
tinus, Basilides, and Marcion, but Montanism as 
well; and this was first true in Rome about 195, 
in Carthage not till after 203. The apologetic tone 
in which he speaks of John's Gospel and epistles 
implies that he was aware of the attacks made 
upon the Johannine waitings by the Alogi, while 
he seems to know nothing of that of Caius, directed 
against the Apocalypse alone. This question and 
that of the relation of the Shepherd of Hermas to 
the canon were closely connected ^ith the Mon- 
tanist movement and the discussion stirred up by 
it in regard to discipline and to the place of proph- 
ecy in the Church. If the document was written 
within the region of Roman influence, it can scarcely 
have been written before 200-210. This excludes 
several suggested names for the author, such as 
Papias and Hegcsippus. Caius is excluded by the 
fact that he was a bitter opponent of the Apoca- 

lypse, which is mentioned with reverence in the 
Fragment as a woric of the apostle. More plaua- 
ble than this is lightfoot's suggestion of Hippolytus; 
but against it are (1) the author's total silence as 
to Hebrews, in which Hippolytus was much in- 
terested; (2) the opinion that the Apocalypse was 
written before the Pauline epistles^ while Hippo- 
lytus apparently held, as did Irenaeus, that it was 
written under Domitian; and (3) the education 
possessed by the author, which is not that of Hip- 
polytus. For the present, then, all that can be 
said is that a member of ihe Roman church, or of 
some Catholic community not far from Rome, wrote 
in Greek about 200-210 a synopsis of the writings 
recognized as belonging to the New Testament in 
his part of the Church. As the beginning of the 
Milan manuscript is missing, it is not known what 
sort of a work that was from which the compiler 
took what exists, or whether a similar survey of 
the Old Testament preceded it. To judge from 
internal evidence, the Latin version can hardly have 
been made before 350, possibly not till the fourth 

IIL Contents: This docimient is not a canon in 
the original sense of the word, a mere catalogue 
of titles, but is a survey of the entire New Testament, 
with historical information and theological reflec- 
tions appended. 

Although the description of only the third and 

fourth Gospels is complete and only a line of what 

went before has been preserved, it is 

I. Gospels generally admitted that Matthew and 

and Acts. Mark had been discussed. Of uncanoni- 
cal gospels, such as were mentioned by 
Irensus and Origen in similar contexts, nothing is 
heard. The exclusive validity of our four Gospels 
for the author and his environment is perfectly 
apparent. The apologetic way, however, in which 
he speaks of the agreement of these four in all es- 
sentials, and the fact that this comes inmiediately 
after the account of the origin of the fourth and is 
followed at once by a defense of John's assertion 
of his own credibility in I John i. 1-4, show that 
this whole passage is a reply to the position of the 
Alogi towajxi the Johannine writings. Both here 
and in what is said about Mark and Luke, the rela- 
tion of the evangelist to the facts he relates is em- 
phasized. If the word beginning the first line is 
completed in the most probable way, the author 
says that Mark was not an eye-witness of all to 
which he testifies, but wrote his Gospel on the tes- 
timony of one or more who were, though some of the 
facts had come within his own experience. Of 
Luke it is said without qualification that he was 
not an eye-witness but dependent like any other 
historical wTiter on his investigations. Outside of 
his designation as a physician from Col. iv. 14, all 
that is said of him seems to be taken from the in- 
troduction to his Gospel. A brief but graphic de- 
scription of the origin of the Fourth Gospel is given 
in lines 9-16, intelligible only as an excerpt from a 
longer account, and probably to be traced back ta 
the Gnostic Leucius. In lines 34-39 the author 
goes on to the Acts, mentioning for the first time the 
address to Theophilus, but quoting it from Luke, 
not from Acts. The inference that Luke meant 




to assert his own personal knowledge of the facts 
recalls that the version of the Acts prevalent in the 
west until the time of Jerome had the first personal 
pronoun from xi. 27 on, instead of from xvi. 10; 
Uiis favored the exaggerated idea, met in Irenseus 
aid elsewhere, that Luke narrated in the Acts only 
what he had himself been concerned in. This 
would explain the now generally accepted reading 
of lines 37, 38, according to which Luke accounts for 
closing his narrative before the martyrdom of 
Peter and the departing of Paul from Rome on his 
Spanish journey, both of which events occurred, 
according to the author, before the writing of the 

The Pauline epistles are treated (lines 39-68) in 

the following order of those addressed to churches: 

I and II Cor., Eph., Phil., Col., Gal., 

2. Pauline I and II Thess., Rom. This order 
Episdes. the author considers to represent that 
of their composition; its beginning 
and end are nearly those of Tertullian's list, and 
there may be indications of the same order both 
in Clement of Rome and in the East. After dis- 
cussing these epistles, addressed (like John^s ad- 
monitions in Revelation) to seven churches, as 
typifying or symbolizing the universal Church, he 
proceeds to the letters addressed to individuals, 
asserting their reception by the Catholic Church. 
Tlien he mentions two epistles written in the name 
of Paul after the rise of the heresy of Marcion, those 
to the Laodiceans and the Alexandrians. The exist- 
ence of the former, which is found in many Latin 
scriptural manuscripts, is attested by Priscilllan, 
Philaster, and Jerome, by a Liber de divinia scrip- 
turi8f wrongly ascribed to Augustine, yet of the 
fourth century, and by some ancient prologues to the 
Pauline epistles; in the East the evidence for it 
runs from 370 to 800. That its composition can not 
be dated as late as the period covered by these 
authors and dates is clear enough; it is out of the 
question that about 380, when the proceeedings for 
a definite settlement of Uie canon had gone far both 
in East and West, a new Pauline epistle should 
have found its way into the Bible. At this very 
time Jerome sa/s it was *' rejected by all ''; and 
that this is not hyperbole is shown by the fact that 
in his discussion of the canon Eusebius never once 
mentions it. Its inclusion in some western Bibles 
I of the end of the fourth century can only be the 
bdated influence of a far-distant past; and to 
such a past belongs the protest of the Fragment. 
It is also now generally believed that an apocry- 
phal epistle of John which is first cited about 370 
by Optatus was included in the " Acts of John " of 
Leucius, written 160-70. It is quite possible that 
like this and III Cor. the epistle to the Laodiceans 
and that to the Alexandrians (not now extant) 
formed part of widely circulated legends of the 
apostles in the second century. 

Under the head of other writings recognized in 
the Catholic Church (lines 68-73) there is first an 
assertion of the canonicity of Jude and two epistles 
of John. There has been much discussion as to 
whether this means the first and second or the 
second and third. It is probable, according to the 
modem reading of the text, that the author men- 

tions two letters designated as those of John in 
their traditional titles, without deciding the ques- 
tion whether John really wrote them. 
3. Other These can only be the second and 
Writings, third, whose writer calls himself 
merely " the elder." Having already 
treated the first, though only incidentally, in 
connection with the Fourth Gospel, and there 
declared his unquestioning belief in its Johannine 
origin (lines 26-34), the author felt able here to 
confine himself to the two smaller letters. Next 
follows a remarkable mention of the " Wisdom 
written by the friends of Solomon in his honor," 
which is rendered more intelligible by the conjec- 
ture of Tregelles that the translator had before him 
a Greek phrase which attributed the book of Wis- 
dom to Philo, according to a wide-spread western 
tradition, and made hypo phili^ out of hypo PhU- 
dno8. The book was naturally mentioned next to 
the epistles of John, because like them it was read 
in the Church in spite of the incorrectness or doubt- 
fulness of ite usual title. The words which close 
this section are not susceptible of a rational 
explanation as they stand, " We receive also the 
Apocalypse of John and that of Peter only, although 
some of us will not have [them, or, the latter] read 
in church" [ANF. v. 604]. Even the mention 
and still more the recognition of an Apocalypse 
of Peter in the West is inconceivable in the light 
of the fact that not a single quotation from the 
oldest western writers can be adduced to show their 
knowledge of it; and it is equally difficult to account 
for the failure to mention at least I Peter in a work 
of this kind. The most probable hypothesis is that 
of the loss of a few words, perhaps of a line, in which 
I Peter and the Apocalypse of John were named as 
received, and II Peter as objected to by some 
members of the church. The Shepherd of Hermas 
is discussed in lines 73-80, with the assertion that 
it should never be read in divine service on a foot- 
ing with the prophete and apostles, while the duty 
of reading it elsewhere (presumably in small, in- 
formal gatherings or in catechetical instruction) 
is insisted on. The subsequent history of the 
Shepherd corresponds to the position of compro- 
mise here adopted. The Fragment closes with the 
rejection of certain ^Titings which are in use among 
heretical parties (lines 81-85). In these lines the 
corruption of the text and perhaps the defecte of 
the translation reach their height, so that the es- 
tablishment of a satisfactory text is almost hopeless. 
The mention of Valentinus is intelligible, for his 
school had a special *' True Gospel " besides the 
canonical ones; Basilides also gave out a gospel of 
his own, and used all sorts of Apocryphal writings. 
The most obscure point is the connection of the 
name of Marcion with " a new book of psalms." 

IV. Ruling Ideas: The tone of the whole treatise 
is not that of legislation but of explanatory state- 
ment of an established condition of things, with 
only a single instance of difference of opinion 
among members of the Catholic Church. There 
is no difference in authority between the Old Tes- 
tament (**the prophets") and the New ("the 
apostles " ). The only distinction is that the number 
of the former class is fixed, while that of the latter 


ia Btill U) Home extent open. II Fcler ia still dis- 
cussed; tlipre are apparently some in the church 
-who regarded the epbtlcs to the Laodiceuns and 
AleKandriana as on a footing with the otheru; and 
the proceedings in regard to the Shepherd had 
■hown that some had been inclined sliortly before 
to admit it into the cat^ory of Scripture. Apart 
from these points, however, the Nevf Testament is 
regarded as definitely made up of the four Gospels, 
the Acts, thirt«en epistles of Paul, the Apocalypse 
of John, probably three epistles of hia, Judc, and 
probably I Peler, while the oppoBition (ji another 
of Peter's writings wua not yet alenced. The 
decision in regard to the Shepherd is the first clearly 
proved step in the differentbtion between the 
Holy Scriptures and a. class of books which did 
not stand on the name plane, though they were 
commended as edifying. When, how, and by whom 
the canon as he received It was established the 
author does not say, nor (toea he display any hiS' 
torical knowledge of the process and tlie gjounds 
DO which the decision was made. (T. Zarn.) 


Miff] m 

evprthelpAS he was proieDt. and wo he 
rativoj. The lliird book of the Cioapel i» 
^ukc. Luke, the nell-known phyaicion. 

t, when P 
IB fori 

] hud Bl 

B [i.o., . 

o find out the fodta]. tt ia true that be bud not 
ID the Lord ia the flesh, yet bavins aaecrtoined the fact« 

e fourth booli of the Unpcl is that of John, one of the 
cipl». In response to the eihortetion of hia fellow ilia- 
lea and biehope ba said: " foat ye with me for three days, 

in hie ow 


VKS to rolato ia hie oi™ nam 

, they all acUng as 

. And 80 to tho faith of b< 

dbconl. c 

-en although different aelecti 

na are (iven from 


m the uidividaal hooka of the 

Gospels, because in 

nil [of the 

s] under the one (uidins »piri 

all the IbingB rela- 

tivc to hia 


w, and hia twofold advent, th 

firat in the humili- 


CK from contempt, which took 

pinee, and (he .ec- 


glory of kingly power, which 

been dcchired. What morvoJ ia it. (hen 

"if John^dunsTw 

what we have Been wilb our e 

yo8, and beard with 

oar ma, 

md our hands have handlod, t 


For thua he pioSasa to b 

not only an eye- 


t also a hearor and narrator of all the wonderful 

bo Lord, in their order. 

^. the ncta of nil the apostlM 

are writt™ in one 

book. Li 

ke |bo| compriaod them for 

the moat eidcllent 


H, because the individual even 

t« took plaee m bis 

na ho cloarly shows fbyl onu 

Peter as well ns the depnrtare of Pmil w 

len the latter went 


ity [of Rome] to Spain. 

e epiatles of Paul, what (hey 

what naiB 

on they were sent, they Ihems 

elvM make clear to 

bim who will unrlemlaDd. Pint of all h 

wrota at length to 

the Conn 

hergay, then to the 

Ihe order 

of the ^riptura, inlimating at 

chief mat 

.cr in them— each of which it i. 


iting that (lie blessed Apostle Paul binuelf. follow- 


mmple of bis pmdeoeaaor John 


owing order; to the 


IB (fiisO, to the Ephaiinns (set 

oud), to the Philip- 

piling (Ih 

), (o the GaUtiona 

(GIth). to 

Romans fsi'venth). 

But thouKh he writw twei- for the anke 

of dorrei^tion to the 

oothy: [and 
lation of occlsdastical discipline. 

bown (T U., by this 
Titingl: and Jobn aJso in the ApocsJypae. though 
lo seven churclxo. yet speaks to all. But [ba 

~ ■ h»e] are held sacred 

catholic in (he leeu- 

Thcro sie adduced also 

the Alexandtians. forged 

t) the bervsy of UATcioa, 

and many otheTs which eon not he received into the Churdk 

catholic, for it ia not fitting that gaU be mingled with honey. 

Further, an epistle of Jude and two beiuing the name of 

John ore counted among the Catholic [Epistl«l ■ : and 

Wisdom, written by the friiKda of Solomon in hia honor. 

We receive the Bpoostypaes of Julm and Peter only, which 
[latter] some of us do not wish to be read in chunh. But 
Herman wrote the ShephoTtt in the city of Rome most n- 
cently ia our own times while his brother bishop. Piua, mtf 
oceupymg the chair of the church of Rome; and so indeed 
it ought (o be read; but that it be nude public to the petK 
pie ID the cbuieh or [phieed| among the pfopbeta (whoiM 
number is complete! or amoog the apostka il not poHibl* 
to the end of time, 

at Aisinoui (or Vftlentjniia) or Uiltiadea we ncnve Dolb- 
iOK at all. Those also who wrote the new book of psalms 
for Horcian, together with Basitldes who founded the Aaaa 
t^tapbrygiaoa (T) , . . 

the text, eoliationa ore to bo found in: M. J. Routh. Re- 
liguia •arra, J, 389-434, Oxford, IMBl in TSK. 1S4T, 
pp. Sia-Szg; C. K. Bunsen, AnalMa antmicana, i. 137- 
Ul, London. t8fi4: S. B. Tregetln. Canon JtficralDnaBU, 
London. 1808; A, Reifteivcheid, in SititmaibcneliU dw 
Wiener Aktulanie, hi^macA-phHoaophitche Xlrun, Ixvii 
(1871), 406 Ktn.; B. F. Weateotl. OaienU Sumu of 0- 
HiH. ofOt Canon, pp. 521 aqq., Louduo. ISSO: A. Hsniscfc, 
in ZKO. lii. 566-59(1: T. Zabn. QtKhiMe da nevmlancfK- 
tidim Kamnui, li, 1007, Ldpsic, ISai: E, Freuscben. Aua- 
Iteia, pp. ix., 12S-137, Frdburg, II 

I treated In aUtbe 

. of his HiMorical 
if JV, T,. London, lasS), and in many 
e early Church. Rpeeiolly w 

r. 603-004. The a 

ment, in the works on N. T. i; 

gives also the text, do. 43-44 of 

/ntrodudibn Co . . . 

^tKhichU da 

liehm Kanom. ed. Volkmar, pp. M1-I70. 341-383, Berlin. 

tSeO: F. H, HesBe. Cos tnuraionxhr Fraemmt. CieneD. 

IBT3: Hilgenfdd In ZWT, 1S72. pp. 560-582, 1874. pp. 

214^-231, ISSO, pp. 114-121. 1881. pp. 129-170; H*i- 

nack, in ZeUKhHU /Or luUirriicht Thfoloeie und Kirehe, 

1K74. pp. 374-288. 445-ie4, idem in ZKO. iii (1879), 

""" I. pp. 330-333 

-ISei G. Kuho, 
I, ItNZ: H. Lietsmana, 
■ immarcAianiacAcn Pro- 

idem. LiarratuT. i. 649-847, i 
.: T. Zohn. ut sup., it. 
aoritefir Froffmeni^ Zuric 
ilorirche Fragmnti und di 
n Emnediai, Bonn, 1901 

MURDOCK, JAMES: American scholar; b. 
in Westbrook, Conn,, Feb. 16, 1776; d. in ColiimbuB, 
Miss., Aug. 10, 185G. He was graduated from 
Yale &)llege, 1797; eptered the Congregational 
mtniHtry; waa pastor in Princeton, Maiis., 1802-lS; 
profesaor of ancient languages in the Univeraity 
of Vermont, 1815-19; professor ot sacred rhetoric 
and eccieaiaaticol history in Andover Theological 
Seminary, 1819-2S; retired to New Haven, and 
from then till his death devoted himself exclu- 
sively to the study of church history, orieotalia, 
and philosophy. The principal fruits of this learned 
leisure are a translation from the German of Htlii- 
acher'B Eletnentt of Dogmatic Hielory (New Haven, 
1830); a translation from the Latin of Moaheim's 
Institutes of EccUeiatiicai History (New Haven, 
1S,']2); a translation of Mosheim's CtminifTiIariat on 

■ The Lalimty of thia h 

makes it untranslatable; 


the Affairt 0/ Ife Christiana btfme llie Time of Con. 
^antiat the Greol (2 vols., New York, 1851-52); 
The SeiB Tetlament: a liierai Trandation from the 
Sj/riae Pegkito Verrion (1S52). He also edited, with 
preface and notea, Milman'a Hiilonj 0/ Christianitt/ 
'IMD, and wrote The Nature of the AUmenienl 
(Andover, 1823); and SktUhes of Modem Phiioeo- 
jhif, eapeeiaJly among the Oermana (Hartford, IS42). 

HinUIER, THOMAS: German Catholic priest 
and poet; b. at Oberehnlieim (15 m, a.w. of Stras- 
burg) probably Dec. 24, 1475; d. there Aug. 23, 
1537. He entered the Franciscan order ut Strua- 
burg 1490; was ordajced priest in 1494; studied 
tfaeolog}' at Paris, Ian ut Freiburg, and philosophy, 
libilology, and mathematics at Cracow, 1-195-1 5(M), 
taking his doctorate some time before 1509. About 
1500 or 1501 Mumer Is said to have lived at Soto- 
thuTQ in order to become tumiliar with the Swiss 
monasteries. In 1502 he returned to Strasburg. 
Be attempted at Cracow and other places to teach 
kigic and even jurisprudence by means of charts, 
ChartUudiKm LogictE (Cracow, 1507) and Charti- 
buJuim IruHinie Summarie (1518). In 1508 ho 
■W9B at Strasburg, where he was attacked by Ulrich 
ZaaiuB on account of his humanistic leanings. 
UuiDer, OD the other hand, maintained that the 
study of ancient literature was not incompatible 
witb a pious and cbaste life and that contact n'ith 
the world neceesitAted classical education even for' 
clergymen. In his Ludus Stuiientum FreibuTgen- 
titan (Frankfort, 1511) he taught even prosody in 
k figurative manner. His greatest renown was won 
by his aatires, in which he was thoroughly at home. 
In 1512 appeared his HarrenbeKhBorung and 
Sehdmemttnfi, the former at Strasburg, 'be ,atter 
ftt Frankfort. The iVarTenbescAwifirunj; was in- 
fluenced by the Narrenxhiff of Sebastian Brant, 
but its originality has not euETered from that fact. 
The Sc/idmemunft is the Narrenbeechwdrung ab- 
breviated. In both poems Mumer attacked the 
deficiencies and frailties of all classes, the gluttony 
■ikI rebellious turn of the peasants, ttie arrogance, 
egoism, and niggardlineas of citizens, the vanity 
o( women, the rapacity, debauchery, and brutality 
of the nobility, the insubordination and egoism of 
the imperial princes, but especially the ignorance, 
levity, unchastity, avarice, and unscrupulousness 
of the clergy. But in criticism of the Church, 
Uumer never went beyond abuses in the Churcli; 
its constitution and doctrines he did not assail. 
He attacked not pereonaJities but principles, or 
rather, the lack of them. In 1514 appeared his 
poem, Ein andtchlig geialliche Badenfahrt and in 
1515 Die MaUe von Schwyrideleahrym und Gredt 
Uitierin Jahrieit. Die geuchmal lu Siraf alien 
vybxhen mannen (Basel, 1519) is directed against 
looUsb lovers and ladies' men and forms a rich 
■ource for the history of manners, customs, and 
fashions. In 1519 appeared hia tratialation of the 
ImtitutioneTt which in 1521 was renewed under 
the title, Der keyaerlichen SlatTcchlen ein Ingang 
and wares Ftindamenl. The popularizing of legal 
■cience was a need of the time. But, though Mur- 
ner discerned the corruption of the Roman Catholic 
Church, he waa decidedly hostile to the Reforma- 

tion. Against Luther Mumer wrote no less than 
thirty-two pamphlets of which only five or six have 
been printed: Ein ckrietliche uiid briedertiehe Er- 
manung 2U dcm hofhgelerlm Doctor Martina Luier 
(1520); For Doctor Miiriinus Luiere iercn und 
predigen, dat tie org wenig teitit (1520); Von dem 
balistenihum . . . wyder Doctor Mariinum Luther 
(1520); xiin new lied von dcm umiergang dee Chritl- 
lichen Glaubena in Brwler Veiten thon (1621); 06 
der Kiinig uvs engelland ein liigner sey oder der 
Luther (1522). But in spite of his zeul, he gained 
littleacknowledgment even among Roman Catholics, 
and hia attacks had not the least effect upon hia 
opponents. Hii satires lacked religious enthu- 
sinsm and sincerity. His best satire is Von dem 
grosaen luUuriachen Narren wie j'n Doctor Alumer 
beschworen hat (1522). But the poem was imme- 
diately suppressed by the council of Strasburg, and 
Muriier was forbidden to print anything else. In 
1523 Mumer \nsited in England with Heniy VIII.. 
whose treatise on the seven sacraments agaitist 
Luther he had translated in the preceding year. 
After hia return the Reformation had victoriously 
entered Strasburg, and Mumer removed to Ober- 
ehnbeim, but driven away by the Peasants' War, 
he fled to Switzerland. Having settled at Lucerne, 
he became the head of the Roman party, and one of 
the most energetic opponents of Zwingli. But in 
1529, after Lucerne was defeated in the first war 
of Kappel, Mumer had to flee once more. He 
escaped to Woilis and then took refuge nith 
Elector Frederic II. in the Palatinate. In 1530 
he returned to Oberchnheim where he spent the 
rest of his life. (F. LisTt-) 

BlDUDOftAPur; G. E. Wsliisu, Nmhrichim mn Thamat 
Afumrrt Lit,m und SchnUm. .Nuremlxrg, 1775; J. Hchcl- 
blo, Dnt Klatter. vol. iv.. StuitKiirt. IS-lfl; J. Hub. Hit 
komiiehc und haninriaiir'ic Lilcralar . . . da IB. Jahr- 
AumlrrCj, NurambHrK, ISfiS; W. Kavenu.Thomaii Mamtr 
und du Kifche da MUlelalUrt. Hnlle. ISDU; idem, Tlioimit 
Mumer und die dctUfht Rr/armaliair. ib, 1891; K. Ott, 
in Alamannia, xiiii. U4-lSt, 231-288. 

MURPHY, FRAHCIS: Apostle of tof^l absri- 
nonce and evangelist; b. at Wexford (64 m. a.w. of 
Dublin), Ireland, Apr. 24, 1836; d. at Los Angeles, 
Cal., June 30, 1907. He emigrated to the United 
StMt«a while a young man; served as a private 
during the Civil War; began work in Portland, Me., 
OS on advocate of total abstinence in 1870, and led 
the campaign in that stale for several years; bis 
success there led to the extension of the movement 
over the entire country, until it was eetimiited that 
over 10,000,000 had signed the pledge, which in- 
volved not only abstinence from intoxicating drinks 
but earnest effort to induce others to the same. The 
great results of his work in the United States led, 
in 1881, to his tieing called to England and the con- 
tinent, where his successes were continued for four 
years, Ou his return he laaiie bis home for some 
years in Pittsburg, Pa., but continued his nork on 
the platform. In 1900 he went to Hawaii to pre- 
sent his causfc, then to Australia, returning in 1901 
and making his home in Los Angeles, Col., but con- 
tinuing his work till f ailin g eyesight compelled bis 
retirement in 1900. 

MUHPHY, JAMES GRACEY: Irish Presbyterian, 
exegele; b. at Bollyatlikilikan in the parish of 


Comber (H m. s.e. of Belfast), Ireland, Jan, 12, 
IMM; d. at Belfast Apr. l!l, lH'Mi. He graduated 
from Triuity College, Uubliii (A.B., 18%)]; beciime 
minister at Ballyshannon, 18.'Sn; cluwical head 
imiHter at the Royal Bclfiutt Academical Institu- 
tion, 1841; and profcsaor of Hebrew, PreHbyteriun 
College, Belfast, 1847. He wua the author of A 
Latin (Immmar (London, 1847); A Hebrew Gram- 
mar {1K57); Ninrlren IniponaUnlilieg of Part Firat 
<[/' CoUnto on Uie Pentateuch Htioien to be Poaaible; 
with a Critique on Fart Two (Belfast, im^i); The 
Human Mind; A SyiUtm of Hum-in PhiloBOpky 
{London, 187:t); the voIuRie on Chronicles in 
Hamlbooka for Bible Clauses (Edinburgh, 187U); 
Sacrifiee a» net forth in Scripture; The Carey Lec- 
tures for 1888 (Ixjndon, I8»'.l). He wob also the 
nutlior of commentarieu on Genesis (PJlinbui^b, 
1804); ExoduB (186G); Leviticus (1872); Psalina 
<1875); Revelation (London, ISS2); and Daniel 
(1884); he tranelated C. F. Keil'a commentary on 
Kingu (Edinburgh, 1857); and assisted in the trans- 
lation of E. W. Hcngstcnbec^'s commentuty on 
EzckicI {I8C'J); he also translated, enlarged, and 
edited 0. Zdckler'a conunentary on Chronicles 

inrRRAY, JOHH: Founder of the Univer- 
Balist denomination in America; b. in Alton (15 ro. 
n.p. of Winchester), Hiimpshire, Eiig., Deo. 10, 1741; 
(1. in Boston, Mass., Sept. 1), 1815. His father was 
un Anglican and his mother a Presbyterian, both 
Strict Calviniats, and bia home life was attended 
by religious severity. In 1751 the family settled 
near Cork, Ireland. In 1760 Murray returned to 
England and joined Whitefield's congregation; but 
embracing, somewhat later, the Universaliatic 
tcnehings of James Relly (q.v.) he was excom- 
municated. In 1770 he emigrated to America, 
and preached, oa a UniversoJist minister, his first 
Bertnon in Good Luck, N. J., Sept. 30, 1770, which 
place he made his home till 17T4, itinerating from 
Virninift to New Hampshire, In 1774 he settled 
at iiloucester, Mass., and eetablishni a congregation 
there. He was suspected of being a Britisli spy, 
but in 1T75 was chaplain of the Rhode Island 
Brigade before Boston. He participated in the 
first general Universalist Convention at Oxford, 
Mass., September, 1785. On Oct. 23, 1793, he be- 
came pastor of tlie Utuversalist society oE Boston, 
nnd faithfully served it until Oct. 19, 1809, 
when paralysis compelled him to give up preaching. 
Re wua a man ot great courage and eloiiuence, and 
in the defense of his views endured much detesta- 
tion and abuse. In regard to Christ, he taught 
that in him God became the Son; for "God the 
Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, 
lire no more than different exhibitions of the self- 
Bumc exLsteiil, omnipresent Being." He taught 
tliiit all men would ultimately be saved through 
tiic sacrifice of Christ, the bnsia for this being the 
union of all men in Christ, just as they were united 
with Adam, and therefore piutuking of the benefits 
of his siicrifice. He was also a writer of hvmns 
and a compiler of hymnals. 
BlRUoaoAPBT: Souma an hii own Lrllm and Stiftrhn o/ 

n Cliureh tfilnni lirrifi. 

MDHRAY, mCHOLAS: Presbyterian conlro- 
vcrsitkiist: b. at Ballyiuiskeagb (20 m. s.w. of 
Belfast), Ireland, Dec. 25, 1803; d. at Ehzobeth- 
town, N.J., Feb. 4, 1861. He emigrated to America 
1818; was employed as printer by Harper & Broth- 
era. Brought up a Roman Catholic, he was in 
1820 convertcii to Protestantism, and, after grad- 
uation at Willi.ima College (1820) and at Prince 
ton Theological Scininuiy (1820) became a Presby- 
terian pastor, first at Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1829, 
and from 1834 till his death at Elizabetbtown, 
N. J. In 1849 he was moderator of the (Old 
School) General Assembly. His fame rests upon 
his able and witty Letters to the Rigid Rev. John 
Hughes, Roman-Catholic Bishop of New York (3 
series. New York, 1847-48, revised ed., 1855). a 
keen exposure of certain abuses in the Church of 
Rome abroad. These letters appeared in the New- 
York Observer, over the signature of " Kirwan," 
since he, like Kirwan (([.v.) was a convert. They 
attracted wide notice at the time, and mode his 
name a household word. They have been trans- 
lated into several languages. He addressed another 
series to Chief Justice Taney, published in 1852 
under the title Romanism at Home (1S52). He 
also wrote Nolea, Historical and Biographical, eon- 
ceming ElizabethUnim (Elizabeth town, 1844); Afen 
and Things as I saw them in Europe (1853); Paritk 
and Other PeneiUingn [IS54); Preachers and Preach- 
ing (1860); and a volume of sennons, A Dying 
Legacy to the People of my Beloved Charge (18€1). 
B.Bi.HjnHiiPHV: S. I. Prime. Mtmoim of Ihi Rtv. Nii*ola4 
Uuirav. New York. 1S6^. 

MDRRHOnlTES. See Celbbtinbs. 

MOSAEUS, mfl-sJ'uR. JOHAHH: Lutheran theo- 
logian and controversialist; b. at Laligewiesen 
(27 m. S.B. of Gotha), Thuringia, Feb. 7, 1613; d. at 
Jena May 4, 1681. He studied philosophy and 
the humanities at Erfurt and Jena, but afterward 
devoted himself to theology at the latter university. 
where he became professor of history in 1643 and 
of theology in 1646. Etjuipped with a thorough 
philosophical training, he speedily vindicated the 
application of philosopby to theology against the 
disciples of rigid Lutheran odiiodoxy and advocated 
a careful distinction between creed and thetdogy, 
maintaining that theological investigation should 
be unrestricted. His philosophical training and 
energy enabled him to enter into disputes with 
opponents not only of Lutheraniam, but also of 
Christianity and religion. Thus he wrote against 
Lord Herbert of Cherbury his De lutnini* natura 
iruuJiieieTttia ad satulem (Jena, 1068), based upon 
the thesis that natural theology ia insufGcient for 
the sinner because it knows nothing of atonement 
for ains; and attacked Matthias Kiiutzen in Ida 
Ablehnuiig tier aungesprengten abscheulicken Ver- 
leamdung, ah vdre in . . . Jena eine neue Serie der 
logenannlen Gewissener cnlManden (1674). He also 
polemiied ugaiiist the Jesuits, first against Veit 
Erbermann concerning the Bible of Duke Ernest 
the Pious in hw Biblia Lutheri auspicils EmeHi 
dud» . . . i/losHs ac iiderpretalionibwt iUuttnita— 


a Viti Erbrrmanni, ilerata nakdiixntia vindieata 
(1663) and concerning the Church in his Tradatut 
dt tcclrgia (lUTl); then againat Jodocus Kedde in 
bis Vertfuli^ng lUa unbrmcglichen Grujidce, deesen 
der Augsbuiyisrhen Konftseion vertcandte Lchrrr 
IKBI Beicria ihrer Kirchen tich g^aurhen (IC54), 
and finally againat Jakob Moaeniua in two theologi- 
cal disputations, oT which the more importjint is 
cDtided De etdeaia. Another treatifie of the same 
csU^ot; 13 his Traelatug theologicua de amversione 
hominit petxatorU mi Deum (IGOl). He likewise 
entered into a. controversy with the Annlniani) 
r^anling the salvation of the heathen, oppojcd 
the Sociiiians, and also devoted mueh lubor to the 
critique of Reformed doctrines and traditions. In 
hlB D« wax [irincipiorum raliona el philosopkia 
tn amtrorersiia theologicia (1644) he attacked the 
eseemive use of philoi»phy in theology among the 
Befotmed tbetJogians, and opposed M. F. Wende- 
lin and the doctrine of predestination in his ZJe 
oitTTta rUctionia decreto an ejut aligTia eitra Drum 
eauaa impulsiva dtiur name (1663) and his Zte Bocra 
ama nntne eorpui H aangvia ChrUli in ea realUer 
pratrtdiat (1664). After varioua doubts and 
fltrug^es he pi^Ucly attacked the syncretism of 
Caliitus in his Quaslumeg theologicce inter noilralrg 
haettnue agitata de SyTureiimno el Scriplura Kaera 
(1679). His conception of theology as an object 
of heart as well as of bead led him to emphasize 
the importaiux of good works and of the sanctity of 
the will to such a d^ree that he has been charoc- 
teriied as a precurBor of Spener, and these same 
convictions obliged him to oppose the rigid dedni- 
tiona then prevalent in orthodox Lutheran dogmat- 
ics. IJke the other theologians of Jena, Musacus 
refused to sign the Conanaua repelitut fidei vere 
Lulherana, drawn up by Calovius (q.v.) in 1655, re- 
maining true t« this decision even t^ter Duke Ernest 
the Pious tried to negotiate peace (1670-72). A long 
and bitl«r controversy ensued. After the death of 
the duke in 1675 Joban Reinhard published in Wit- 
tenberg his Thettlogorum Jenejtitiiimerrores, ia v/bicb 
be listed no less than ninety-three heresies, cLiefly 
(ram the lectures of Musaeus. In accordance with 
the unanimous resolution of the faculty of Jena, 
Husaeua, then their dean, replied in his Der jeni- 
thm Theologen atafuhrliclx Erkldrung Hber 93 
nrmeinte ReHgiorafragen oder KonlToveriien (1677), 
whereupon Calovius attacked him in the continua- 
tion of his Syttema locorum. In 1679, however, a 
formal visitation of the university of Jena was insti- 
tuted, and all the professors, nineteen in number, 
were forced to subscribe to a new formula and to 
renounce their syncretism. The Prirleclioneg in 
tpilomen Formula Conconlia (1701) and the Com- 
pendium Iheologice ■poxilivtc appeared posthumously. 
One of the chief merits of Musaeus was his eom- 
plelion of the system of natural theology by giving 
due consideration to the religious and ethical ca- 
pacity of the natural man, tliua seeking to deter- 
mine the process of conversion. He taught that 
the natural will could turn effectually to right- 
eousness, though only in an obscure way (Rom. 
ii. 30 tieq.. s. 2.). Despil« the attacks of his 
opponents, Musaeua was orthodox, although he 
irus less e:isily sutisfied with the various statements 

of the orthodox system than the Wittenberg the- 
ologians, his scientific conscience compelling him 
to search for proofs and to base his doctrines upon 
safe principles. The most important service, how- 
ever, which Muaaeus rendered the Lutheran Church 
was his check to the exclusive rule of the Witten- 
berg orthodoxy without denying or perverting the 
true tenets of Lutheraniam, (Johannkh Kcinze.) 
DiHUoaFuPHT: For earty BOurm caiuult: Hnuck-Hsnog, 
RE. liii. GT3. CaoKulC: F. W. Buck, Fit Joanne «■»<», 
Jena. 1802; A.. Cnlovius, HiiOoHa lyna-rtiMira, 16S2: 
J, U, Wdeh. KrliffiaruarrHiotnlHi vm da- fl^/nrmaMm 
an, parts i.-iii., JeiiiL, 1733 iK|q.; idem, Rrliei-mnlrnliii- 
keiten der emngeliiieh-lvi/irruehen Kirtht. pnTtM iv.-v.. lb. 
1730; H. Schmid, OrtcfiiclilnifrtunkTrtiMKlift SlniHe- 
ktii/n, pp. 400^20. Eriangeo. ISiti; E. L. T. Henke, 
aeara Caliiiui uihJ tcine Zril. vol. ii., Halie, ISOO; O. 
Fnuik. Dirjmauplit Thtolaeie. Ldpaie. ISflB; A. Tholuck, 
Varoixhichlr drm Raiiimalitmyu. vols, i.-ii.. Untie. 19X1- 
1SS2; W. Clisa. GtKhithle dtr proUttarUixh tn Dogmalik, 
ii. 20Z-ZI2, Berlin, l)jS7. 

HDSAEUS, PETER: Lutheran theologian- 
brother of Johann Musaeai; b. at Langewiesen 
(27 m. s.e. of Gotha), Thuringia, Feb. 7, 1020; 
d. at Kiel Dec. 20, 1674 He obtained his edu- 
cation at Jena and Helmstedt; through the in- 
fluence of Georg Calixtus, he received a position 
at Rinteln, first as professor of philosophy in IMS 
and five years later as professor of theology. In 
the latter capacity he took part in the colloquy 
of Cassel (1601), but incurred the displeasure of the 
orthodox by the concessions which ho favored. 
Musaeus himself is said to have been offended 
later by the encroachments of the Reformed and to 
Iiave left Rinteln. From 1663 to 1G65 he was profes- 
sor in Helmste<lt, and in 1663 was called to the new 
university of Kiel, where he opposed syncretism and 
union, especially in his Liber de fugiendo ayncre- 
iismo jutsu Chrittiani Alberli I>uciM Holmlia gcrip- 
lut (Kiel, 1670), but satisfied neither the Lutherans 
nor the Reformed. His versatile training in phil~ 
osophy and his scholarship were considered even 
superior to his brother's, but their tlieotogical tend- 
encies were the same. (Johannes Kunze.) 
BiBuoaHAPHi: J. M611or, Cimbria tttrrala, ii. 5e5-A73, 
Copenhacoa. 1744; C. A. Elotle, LttictubevhrrAunii alltr 
Profatarum Throloaia zu Rinldn. i. 276-290. Hanover, 
1752: F. W. t^trieaer. HtuiKhe GrlthnengachichU. ii. 
321-328. Caossl, 1704. 

theologian; b. at Schneeberg (21 m. s.w. of Chem- 
nitz), Saxony, 1514; d. at Frankfort-on-the-l.Ider 
Sept. 29, 15S1. He was educated at the I^itin 
school of his native city, and at the University of 
Leipaic. In 1638, after acting as a tutor for sev- 
eral years, he resumed his studies, this time at 
Wittenberg, where ho became an enthusiastic 
disciple of Luther. At the instance of J oh aim 
Agricola, whose brother-in-law he seems to h:ive 
been, he was appointed to a position at the l'ni~ 
versify of Frankfort and also as preacher of the 
Franciscan Church in 1541. As an orthodox Lu- 
theran, however, he became involved in disputes 
with his colleague Ludecus, whom he attacked In 
several theses (directed at the same time against 
Melunchtbon and the entire Wittenberg school). 
Melanchthon was much displeased at the atlitude 
of his former pupil, and in a letter of I54S en- 
deavored to instruct and appease him. Husculua 




succeeded Ludecus, on the latter's removal to Sten- 
dal, both as pastor and professor, was also made 
rector, and was for a long time the only theological 
teacher of the institution. After the death of 
Agricola he became general superintendent of the 
entire March of Brandenbuig. 

The life of Musculus was a continual battle, 
especially as he was polemic by nature. At first he 
assailed the Interim, then Osiander's doctrine of jus- 
tification, and when Stancari (q.v.) came to Frank- 
fort, the pair speedily became involved in contro- 
versy. In 1552 Elector Joachim ordered both to 
discuss at Berlin the mediatorial office of Christ, 
and Agricola, as arbitrator, decided in favof of 
Musculus. In 1558 Friedrich Staphylus, a Roman 
Catholic convert, who had studied with Musculus at 
Wittenberg, published his TheologicB Af, LtUheri 
trimembria epitome (Cologne, 1558), in which he 
accused Musculus of teaching that Christ suf- 
fered according to his divine as well as according 
to his human nature. Musculus immediately re- 
plied in his Responsio ad viroUntum et maiedtcum 
acriptum Friderici Staphyli (1558), which was an- 
swered, in its turn, by Staphylus in his Defenaio 
pro trimembri thedogia M, Lutheri (Dillingen, 1559), 
in which he clearly proved the truth of his chaige. 
Musculus was accordingly defeated, and retained 
his position only on account of the general resent- 
ment against Staphylus. 

As Melanchthon had only half approved the 
position of Musculus in his dispute with Stancari, 
and had declined the office of arbitrator in their 
controversy, he had rendered himself unpopular in 
the March, and thus helped to prepare the way for 
the long struggle of Agricola and Musculus against 
Philippism (see Philippists) in that territory. 
Agricola attacked his colleague. Provost Buch- 
holzer of Berlin, and Musculus assailed Abdias 
Praetorius, the enthusiastic Philippist in Frank- 
fort who injoyed^ the favor of Elector Joachim. 
The moot point was the formula of the Frankfort 
convention concerning the necessity of good works, 
and in 1558 Musculus began the controversy from 
his pulpit. The mandate of peace issued by the 
elector in 1560 had little effect, but in Feb., 1562, 
Praetorius considered his cause lost and Red from 
the country. Buchholzer, however, opposed Agri- 
cola so successfully that Philippism was victorious, 
and PrsDtorius was able to return two months 
later. In the following year the elector entirely 
changed his mind and Philippism was definitely 
defeated. After the death of Agricola in 1566, 
Musculus bore the responsibility of sole leadership 
in the defense of a pronounced anti-Melanchthon- 
ian and anti-Calvinistic Lutheranism, and in 1574-75 
he published three treatises on the Lord's Sup- 
per to controvert the Crypto-Calvinists, while 
in 1577 his Widerlegung der Calvinisten appeared. 
Musculus increased the bitterness of the controver- 
sies in which he was involved by his vehemence 
and his habit of making his accusations in the 
presence of his congregation. He availed him- 
self of the confidence of his sovereign to erect 
charitable institutions and to found scholarships 
and other aids for students, while he gave 
generous assigtance to the poor. He performed 

faithfully the duties of his office, preached twice 
a week, and undertook frequent tours of inspec- 
tion. In his sermons he criticized the fads and 
abuses of his time, and in this spirit published 
pamphlets such as Wider den Hosenieufd (Frank- 
fort-on-thfr-Oder, 1555); Vom GoUesldstem (1556), 
Wider den Eheteufd (1556); Vom jUnggten Tage 
(1557); Vom Himmd und der HeOen (1559); Von 
dee Teufda Tyrannei in den leUten Tagen (Worms, 
1561); Vom itzt regierenden Epicuro (1569); Be- 
denke das Ende (1572); and Vom Wucher und 
Geiz (1579). He sHao wrote a Latin book of prayers 
(Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1553), which included 
meditations on the passion and on the proper use 
of the Lord's Supper, etc. Among his doctrinal 
works mention may be made of his Enchiridion 
aenteniiarum ac dictorum (1552), citations from the 
works of the ancients in defense of the Lutheran 
doctrine; and Calechiemus . . . der heUigen alien 
Lehrer nach Ordnung der HaupistUcke dee Kaiechia- 
mus (1555), in which he tried to prove that Luther 'a 
doctrine was older than Roman Catholic teaching. 
Joachim II. commissioned him to compile a doc- 
trinal confession from Luther's works for a Bran- 
denbuig Corpus doctrinoe. This work appeared in 
1572, containing the doctrinal system of Musculus, in 
addition to the Augsbuig Confession and the Smaller 
Catechism. Musculus also published an epitome 
from Luther's writings, entitled Theaaurua; Hochr 
niUdicher teurer SchaUs und gulden Kleinod . . . 
aua den BUchem . . . Lutheri zuaammengtbradd 
(1577). In 1576 he helped frame the Book of 
Torgau (see Formula of Concord, § 3), and in 
1577 aided in the final redaction of the Formula 
of Concord. (G. Kawerau.) 

Bibuoorapht: C. W. Spieker, Ld>en9oe9ehiehle da AndrtoB 
Mtutculua, Frankfort, 1858; L. Qrote, in ZHT, 1809, pp. 
377 sqq.; G. Kawerau, J. Affricola, Beriin, 1881; M. 
Osbom, Die TeufeUliUeratur de» 16. JahrhundaU, ib. 1893. 

SLIN), WOLFGANG: Reformed theologian; b. 
at Dienze (9 m. e. of Salzburg), Lorraine, Sept. 8, 
1497; d. at Bern Aug. 30, 1563. He received a 

thorough education in his native 

Early Life town and in the best schools of the 

and neighborhood. He remained for a 

Education, time in Rappoltsweiler, Colmar, and 

Schlettstadt, being powerfully in- 
fluenced by German humanism in the latter city. 
At the age of fifteen he entered the Benedictine 
monastery near Lixheim, and there found an op- 
portunity to plunge into the classics, especially 
Ovid. At the age of twenty he b^gan to study 
theology, and as he showed a talent for eloquence, 
he was entrusted with preaching in the monasteiy 
and in its parochial churches. In 1518 he became 
acquainted \dth Luther's works, and immediately 
became a decided advocate of the new doctrine, 
so that he fled from the monastery nine years later 
and married the niece of his former prior. He 
was then compelled to struggle for existence by 
working as a weaver, but at last seciu^ a position 
as assistant preacher in the village of Dorlitzheim, 
and in 1529 became deacon in the cathedral church 
of Strasbuig. There he learned Hebrew and com- 
pleted his theological education by attending lee- 


tares Bt the univeraty, forming the acquaintance 
of Capito &nd Butser. 

In 1531, through the mediation of tiie council 
rf StiBsburg, Musciilus waa appoint«d preacher of 
the Church of the Holy Cross in Augsburg, and such 
was his activity there that alter six years the cathc- 
-dial church was transferred to the Protestants, 
and he himself wae made lirat preacher. Exceed- 
ingly important was liis participation 
Work ms a in the eSorta for union and his share 
RefonncT. in the negotiations between the theo- 
logians of Wittenberg aiid Upper Ger- 
many- Butzer had been the most zealous advocate 
of a reconciliation between the factions, but had 
been uoable to secure any permanent results, while 
Luther's distrusl of Zuingli led him to suspect 
ererything that proceeded from this direction. 
DesfHte these obstacles, Butzer and Capito contin- 
ued their efforts for union. On the basis of the 
Hdvetic Confession of 1536, Butzer proposed that 
K cmivention be held at Eisenach for the discuasiDD 
of the controverted points, but the cities uf Switzer- 
land declined at the last moment, although the 
towns of Upper Germany sent their delegates, 
MuseuluB being present as the representative of 
Augsburg. Instead of Eisenach, Wittenberg was 
ehosen as the piace of meeting, and the result of 
the conference was the Wittenberg Concordia. 
Musculus avoided everything which might impede 
harmoDy, and for the sake of peace retracted his 
Tetmpolitan viewa concerning the Lord's Supper, 
After his return to Augsburg he eaaily succeeded 
in bringing about the acceptation of the Concordia, 
but the compromise satisiied no one. Zwingli's 
•dherente would not accept it, and when Musculus 
aaw it rejected by all, he returned to his former 
position, which he later expounded in his Confeaaio 
it tacramenlo corporu cl sanguinis dominiei. 
Equally fruitless waa hia participation in the relig- 
iouB conference of Evangelical and Roman theo- 
logians begun at Worms in 1541 and coutinued at 
Regensburg in the following year. In 1544 he 
introduced the Reformation in Donauwdrth and 
wrote a Latin catechism in connection with it. 
He found time to study Greek and Arabic and to 
publish translations of the Greek patristic works, 
thus unconsciously laying the foundation for his 
later versatility. His auceesstul actii-ity at Augs- 
burg was unexpectedly ended by the Augsburg 
Inl«rim of 1548, which waa forced upon the town 
by the emperor. The opposition of the council 
waa soon broken, and Musculus was compelled to 
leave the city, and to seek refuge among strangers. 
He turned to Switzerland where ha waa kindly 
received by Bullinger and Johann Ualler, and at 
la:!t in 1&49 he received a position as professor of 
theology in Bern. 

Musculus may be reckoned among the number of 

those who aided in the reconciliation of the two 

hostile factions then existing at Bern. Although 

he could not be compared with the 

Activitiea older Reformers in creative originality, 

at Bern, his extensive linguistic and theological 

knowledge, as well as his clear and 

thorough exegesis, made him an admirable teacher, 

whQa through his nuioerous commentaries he 

exerted a lasting influence upon his contempo- 

inelined to regarri the differPiices between the 
Reformers as unessential. As he had once con- 
sented to the Wittenberg Concordia in his love of 
peace, so he mediated successfully between the 
extreme tendencies in Bern. Hia theological 
standpoint was nlways that of the Reformed Church, 
as may be seen in his chief dograaticaJ work, the 
Loci contmune* (Basel, 1554; Eng. tronsl. by J. 
Man, London, 1563). His woriis attracted the 
attention of the isolated Protestants in Poland 
and Hungary, and the correspondence which en- 
Busd occasioned hia Vom Auffgang des Worts Goltes 
UTiter den Christen in Ungam, die den THrcken 
vntemorffen. (W. Hadorn.) 

Bi BUM HA phi: Hia diary, with other documanta, is printed 
in T. Kolde, Analccta LutJierann. Goths, 18H3. His life 
by hia son A. Musculua wna editm) by tha biter's son in 
Sj/fiopsii featalium concionuni, Boael. 1595. Later trejit- 
meala ore to lio louad In P. Boyle, DielioKaru Hiiloneal 
and CrUical, iv. a»5-2H8. lAndon. 1737; in the [Wra by 
L. Crate. Hamburg. 1SG:I: and W. T. Streuber, [n Bmur 
ToKlunliwA for IBSO: also in ADB, xxiil. BS-Sfl: and in 
Beta's ifonM. Cpnttmporaru F/fftrttita of Rpfarmira . . . , 
with /nlmJurlion by C, O. McCrie. pp. eO-B4. London. 
1B06. Further infomintion la eirea in S. Fiaehcr, C«- 
KiitJiU dcT Rifomatitm uniJ DUfnitntian in Brm, B«m, 
ISza: S. Ben, LdiemoeKihicUt: M. H. BuUinser. 3 vols.. 
Zurich. I82S-Z9; C. B. Rundeahseen, KonfliiU da Ztrino- 
lianiimuA, Lulhirtum unrf Coliinismm ind^Brmttr I,amle*- 
kirrht ISSt-SS. Bern. 1H42; Fluii. in Brmcr TaKhaibw:k 
far 1§ST. pp. 239 aiiq. 

HnSIC, SACRED. See Sacred Mosic. 

MTJSn., md'sil, ALOIS: Austrian Roman Cath- 
olic; b. at Rychtdfov (a village near Wischau, 22 
m. n.e. of Brunn), Moravia, June 30, 181)8. He 
studied at the universities of Berlin and Vienna, at 
OhnQtz, Moravia {D.D., 1896), in PaleaUno (espe- 
cially at the Ecole biblique, Jerusalem), Egypt, 
Syria (particularly at St. Joseph's College, Beirut), 
in Arabia during 1895-98, and at the British Mu- 
seum, Cambridge, Constantinople, and Arabia in 
1899-lfl02. From 1891 to 1895 he was instructor 
in religion in Mahrisch-Ostrau and in 1898-99 held 
a similar position in OhnQtz. Since 1902 he has 
been professor of Old-Testament exegesis and Sem- 
itic languages in the theological faculty at OlmtltB. 
He has written: I>ie mirischen Kirchen (BriJnn, 
1899); Bibel odtT BiiM {i\)Cm\ Von der Erschaffung 
bit zur SinAfiiU (Prague, 1905); Topographisches 
lur allUstamentlirhen Geachirhte (Ivantschits, 1906); 
KufHr 'Amra (2 vols., Vienna, 1906); Karle von 
Arabia Fetrma (1906); and Arabia Prtraa (3 vols., 

HtJSTOn, ALEXIS : Reformed Church of France ; 
b. at La Tour de Peiltz (12 m. e.s.e. of Lausanne}, 
Switzerland, Feb. 11, 1810; d. at Bordeaux, France, 
Apr. 6, 1888. He studied at Lausanne, and at 
Strasburg (B.D., Lie. Theol., and D.D., 1834); waa 
ordained, 1833; exiled from Piedmont, 1835; went 
to Nimes, France, where he waa naturalized; lived 
at Bordeaux Hrst aa assistant pastor, 1836—10, then 
aa pastor, Hia productions of interest and impor- 
tance are: Hietoire des Vauiloia liet valliea du Pie- 
tmmi ei de leurt colonies depuis leur arigint jusqu'ii 
no» jourt (vol. i., Paris, 1834; put by the Roman 
Cathohc hierarchy upon the Index); Lea Martyrs 

Kutilations and Marks 



vaudoia ou les confesseurs de la v^riU dans lea valUes 
du PUmoni . . . (1849); Ularael dea Alpea. Pre- 
mikre hiatoire complHe dea Vaudoia du Pihrumt el de 
leura coloniea (1851 ; Eng. transl., The Israel of the 
Alpa: a Complete Hiatary of the Vaudoia of Pied- 
mont and their Coloniea, Edinburgh, 1857); Lea 
Vaudoia dea Alpea italiennea, de 1686 d 169 J^, pocme. 
Lea Premiera Chanta (Paris, 1855); Lea NifUmiiea, 
ou Vexpulaion, I'cxil et le retour dea Vaudoia dana 
leur patrie, de 1686 d 1690 (1850); La Goaaen op- 
prinUe: hiatoire juaqu*ici inconnue dea igliaea Vau- 
doiaea . . . (1850); Hiatoire populaire dea Vaudoia, 
enrichie dea documenta irUdiia (1862); VaUUaie, 
poeme (1863); Le Prihialorique dana lea pay a de 
Montbdiard et lea contriea circonvoiainea (Mont- 
b^Iiard, 1887). He contributed papers on archeo- 
logical subjects to the journal of the Soci^t^ Scien- 
tifique et M^cale of Montb^liard. 


In Deut. xiv. 1 the Hebrews are prohibited from 
practising two customs, cutting the person and 
"shaving between the eyes" for the dead; the 

reason assigned for the prohibition in 

The Legal verse 2 is that they are a people holy 

Status, to Yahweh. Ezekiel, in his legislation 

for the Hebrew Utopia (xliv. 20), for- 
bids the priests to indulge in either of two extremes, 
shaving the head and wearing the hair long. The 
priestly law in lAiv. xix. 27-28 goes still further, 
verse 27 forbidding the rounding of the " comers 
of the head " and " marring the comers of the 
beard." An illuminative translation of verse 28 
(in SBOT) reads: " You (i.e., the Hebrew people) 
shall not make incisions in your skin for the dead; 
nor shall you tattoo any marks upon you." Lev. 
xxi. 5 forbids the priests to shave the head or to 
shave off the comer of the beard or to make cut- 
tings in the flesh; and the connection (verses 1-5) 
implies that the practise prohibited is connected 
with mourning. The passages from Leviticus are 
from the " Holiness Code," and the reason assigned 
is the same as in Deuteronomy; the basis of the 
proscription is religious, which implies that the 
practises forbidden were also connected with re- 

Other passages, some of earlier date, which either 
refer to customs similar to those proscribed or use 
the customs rhetorically, imply that in these as in 

other items the legislation cited is cor- 

Biblical recting practises (mostly connected 

Passages with mourning) which had hitherto 

Showing been observed but were at the time of 

Customs, the enactments deemed objectionable. 

The earliest in time of these passages is 
Hoe. vii. 14 (R. V. margin), and apparently the 
ceremony referred to is one of prayer and petition 
to deities for the gift of crops. In Amos viii. 10; 
Isa. iii. 24, xxii. 12; Micah i. 16; Esek. vii. 18; and 
Job i. 20 the shaving of the head is either noted 
without disapproval, or commanded as from Yah- 
weh, or predicted as signs of mourning which will 
result from certain calamities which are to occur 
by way of punishment for sin. Jeremiah makes 
frequent leferenoe to such euBtoms: xvi. 6 deelarei 
that the coming affliotion will be lo ieivera thtt the 

rites of mourning, among them thoee of mutilation 
of the person by incisions and shaving of the head, 
will not be observed; xli. 5 records the fact of cer- 
tain men coming with offerings from Samaria " to 
the house of the Lord " with beards shaven and 
garments rent — both of these customs usual in 
times of mourning; in the rhetorical passage xlviL 
5 baldness (when artificial, a sign of mourning) is 
predicted for Gaza (this passage does not involve 
that the habit was current among Philistines, against 
DBf i. 538) ; probably a similar explanation holds for 
xlviii. 37 (cf. Isa. xv. 2), where the same mark is to 
indicate that Moab will experience calamity (the 
rhetorical character of these passages prevents their 
use to prove the existence of the habit among Philis- 
tines and Moabites). Ex. xiii. 9, 16 (JE) seems to 
imply a (former?) custom of tattooing on forehead 
and hand which had religious significance, with 
which reference such a tender passage as Isa. xlix. 
16 is to be compared. Contrast with this Deut. vL 
8, xi. 18, which represents a later stage when thi 
symbols of religious faith were to be bound upon 
(not tattooed into) hand and forehead. It is diffi- 
cult to decide whether the Exodus passage is purely 
figurative; at any rate it seems to know the cus- 
tom of tattooing. Ezck. ix. 4-6 is expressive and 
characteristic, the literal rendering being ''carve 
a Taw (i.e., the Hebrew letter T) upon the fore- 
heads," etc. Some rabbinic commentators, prob- 
ably erroneously, explain this by the ankh, the 
Egyptian sign of life, which, however, is quite dif- 
ferent in form from the letter Taw. The habit of 
inscribing a sign of religious affiliation on the hand 
is referred to in the Old Testament as late as the 
exile, since the Deutero-Isaiah says (xliv. 6) " An- 
other shall write on his hand ' Yahweh's ' " (cf. 
R. V. margin), the purpose being to designate a 
man as a servant or wor^per of Yahweh. I Kings 
xviii. 28 is not to be brought into connection with 
the phenomena under discussion, but is to be re- 
lated with those treated under Ecstasy (q.v.). Also 
of slightly different character is the '' mark " o£ 
Cain (Cxen. iv. 15), which is most probably to be 
brought into connection with the clan mark com- 
mon under totemism. The mark of Cain was to 
serve as a deterrent from murderous assault upon 
him, which is the way in which the clan mark op- 
erates, since the killing of a clansman is likely to 
cause a blood feud (cf. Comparative Religion, 
VI., 1, c. § 3). The references to the custom of 
mutilation or tattooing reappear in the Book of 
Revelation; thus in xiii. 16, 17, xiv. 9, 11, xix. 20, 
and XX. 4, those who belong to the beast and wor- 
ship him are said to bear his maik in hand and 
forehead; while in vii. 3-4 the servants of God are 
said to be '' sealed in their foreheads." 

The cases cited in the preceding from the Bible 
fall under two categories, those which arise under 

circumstances of mourning, and thoee 

As which presuppose inmiediate connec- 

Connected tion with deity. The former class is 

with by an increasing number of commen- 

Mouming. tators related to the cult of the dead. 

The cutting or tearing of the hair and 
gashing of the flesh are customs common among 
divene peoples of the past and present. H«- 




Hntilations and Harks 






^4 rodoius (ii. 40) speaks of EJgyptians beating them- 
^ 9Ayf» at the celebration in honor of Isis; in ii. 60 
he relates that Carian residents of Elgypt cut them- 
selves with knives at the same celebration; accord- 
ing to iv. 71 the Scythian mourner cuts bits from 
his ear, shaves his head, cuts his arm, his forehead, 
and his nose, and thrusts an arrow through his left 
hand. Xenophon [Ciprapoediaf III., i. 13) reports 
practically the same customs among the Armenians. 
The Arabs had the custom of scratching the face 
and shaving the head during the period of mourn- 
ing (Wellhauscn, Heidentum, pp. 123-124, 182, 
1»^ID9). The legislation of Solon and the Twelve 
Tables forbade the women of Athens to bring blood 
by self-flagellation (for the legislation of Solon con- 
sult G. Grote, Hist. ofOreecef vol. iii., new ed., Lon- 
don, 1872; for that of the Twelve Tables, M. Voigt, 
Die XH. Tafeln, Geschichle und System des Civil' 
uTki Cnminal^Rec?Ues, wie Processes der XII. Tafeln^ 
2 vols., Leipsic, 1883-S4). The sacrifice of the hair 
and of blood in honor of the manes of the departed 
is well attested for the Greeks (cf. Iliads xxiii. 141- 
131, 135-136) ; while among primitive peoples it is 
still believed that the ghost receives strength and 
new \Tgor from the blood shed by mourners. The 
indications of an ancestor cult among the Hebrews 
are being studied anew, and it is a possibility that 
the mourning customs indicated or forbidden in 
the passages cited from the Old Testament are con- 
nected by derivation from this (cf. C. GrQneisen, 
Ikr Ahnenkultus und die Urrdigion Israel, Halle, 
lOOOi/F, 1.560-571). 

The second class of cases noted in the Bible are 
those in which the mutilations serve to indicate the 
connection of the worshiper with a deity. Light 
on this is thrown by ethnic usages. 
As Signs Herodotus (ii. 13) relates of a temple 
of Worship, near the Canopic mouth of the Nile 
that slaves might find sanctuary there 
^7 devoting themselves to the god and receiving 
upon their bodies sacred stigmata as signs of serv- 
^', and in iii. 8 he notes that the Arabs used the 
^^'nsuie in ring shape, leaving the hair on the crown 
^ the head, in honor of their god Orotal. The 
niany varieties of tonsure — a practise which ranges 
/flwn India to Central America — all connected with 
fe%ion, will at once occur to the reader. Lucian 
(De dea Syria) shows that Syrian priests were tat- 
tooed on neck and wrist, while at Byblus the peo- 
ple shaved their heads at the annual mourning 
for Adonis, while women had the alternative of 
sacred prostitution. Philo (De numarchia^ i.) re- 
marks that idol worshipers were branded. In III 
Mace. ii. 29 it is stated that Ptolemy IV. Philo- 
pator branded Jews with the ivy leaf, the symbol 
of Dionysus. In Asia Minor the worshipers of 
Cybele and other deities received a mark in their 
flesh. For the significance of circumcision see that 
article. Among the races which are most addicted 
to tattooing — as Maoris and East Polynesians — the 
ceremony is often connected with the initiation at 
puberty into the mysteries, or with marriage, both 
being related to religion. The same is true of the 
totem mark, which is produced by scarification, tat- 
tooing, or painting. It is incorrect to assume, how- 
ever, that all tattooing is religious. Much is purely 

decorative, and other purposes are also served, 
such as to indicate membership with societies not 
religious in character. Geo. W. Gilmore. 

Bibuographt: The commentaries on the passages cited 
are often illuminative, especially those which t.ike into 
account the ethnic customs. Consult further: T. Waits; 
ArUhropologie der NeUttrvdUcert paaaixn, 6 parts, Leipsic, 
1859-72; A. Lacassagne. Lea TcUouagee, Paris, 18S1; 
Goldziher, in Revue de Vhirt. dea religiona, xiv (1886), 49- 
61; G. A. Wilken, Revue coloniale intematumale, iii (1886)* 
225-279, iv (1887). 345-426; W. Joest, Ttitowieren, Nar- 
bemeichen und K Orperbemalen, Berlin, 1887; R. Pietsch- 
mann, QeachichU der Fhimizier, i. 389-390. Berlin, 1889; 
J. Batchelor, Ainu, pp. 131-132. Ix>ndon, 1892; F. 
Schwally, Daa Leben nach dem Tode, pp. 16-18, Giessen, 
1892; Stade, in ZATW, xiv (1894), 250-261; H. G. Rob- 
ley, Afoko; Maori Tattooinff, London, 1896; Von Luschau, 
in Zeitachrifi fur Ethnoloffie, xxviii. 1896; J. Frey. Tod, 
Seelenglaube und Seelenkult itn alien larael, pp. 127-173, 
Leipsic, 1898; E. Sergent, Lea Tatouagea dana lea pay a 
chauda, Montpellier, 1901; E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture^ 
London, 1903 (especially valuable for citations of ethnic 
practises); W. R. Smith, Kinahip, pp. 212 sqq.; idem* 
Rd. of Sent., chap, ix.; 'Nowack, ArchAologie, i. 194-196* 
Bensinger, ArchAologie, p. 219; DB, i. 537-539, ii. 283- 
286; EB, i. 971-976. 

MYCONIUS, mi-k6'ni-us (MECUM), FRIED- 
RICH: German Reformer; b. at Lichtcnfels in 
Upper Franconia (20 m. n.n.e. of Bamberg) Dec. 
26, 1490; d. at Gotha Apr. 7, 1546. After graduar 
ting from the school of his native city, he was sent 
in 1504 to the Latin school in Annaberg, where he 
met Tetzel (1510) who was traveling over Ger- 
many as commissary of indulgences. As he was 
greatly troubled by his spiritual condition he was 
persuaded in 1510 to enter the Franciscan monas- 
tery. From Annaberg he went to the monastery in 
Leipsic and in 1512 to that in Weimar. He there 
studied diligently Peter Lombard, Alexander of 
Hales, Bonaventura, Gabriel Biel, and especially 
Augustine, whose works made a deep impression 
upon him. In 1516 he was ordained priest in 
Weimar and soon received a position as preacher 
there. With great satisfaction he listened to Luther 
when he began his fight against indulgences, and 
Myconius was among the first who followed the 
new paths. But as the authorities of Weimar 
maintained a reserved attitude toward the Refor- 
mation, it became more and more difficult for him 
to hold his office. His intercourse and correspond- 
ence were closely watched, and he was threatened 
with life-long confinement in a monastery, being 
sent to the monasteries of Leipsic and Annaberg. 
But in 1524 he succeeded in escaping, and re- 
ceived at Zwickau a position as preacher in a hos- 
pital. At the instance of Wenzeslaus Link and 
Gabriel Didymus he was called to the congregation 
in the small town of Buchholz. In the same year 
(1524) Duke John tjalled him to Gotha, at the re- 
quest of the council and the congregation. Though 
the ground there had been cleared for the Reforma- 
tion, ecclesiastical affairs as well as secular were still 
in a hopeless condition. The higher and lower clei^gy 
had degenerated and a dead ecclesiastical mechan- 
icalism was all that showed. School affairs were 
in the hands of ignorant and indolent monks, and 
in the government of the city and among the mem- 
bers of the council avarice and disorder reigned. 
Myconius mastered the situation by his wisdom 
and energy. About 1525 Luther entered into cor- 




respondence with him, and encouraged him not to 
Ijc friphtene<l off by the rebellious peiisiuits, while 
Mulanchthoii, who began to correspond with him 
in 1527, warned him against imprutient interfer- 
ence in non-religious affairs. Myconius reformed 
the schools of the city and awakened the interest 
of the citizens in them. In the Augustinian monas- 
tery he erected a school whose first rector from 
1524 to 1535 was Basilius Monner of Weimar. My- 
conius exerted great influence both l)y his sermons 
and in hLs practical pastorate and by his exemplary 
conduct. Ilis influence, moreover, was not confined 
to Clotha. He accompanied as preacher Prince 
John Fre<lerick thrct* times to the Ix)wer Rhine, to 
Cologne, Jiilich and Cleves, anrl in 15.'M, after the 
latter had l)ecome elector, to DOsseldorf, Bruns- 
wick, and Celle. On these journeys, Myconius 
preached to large concourses. With Melanchthon, 
Menius, and others he ttwik part in the church visi- 
tations of Thuringia in 1527 and 1533, also in many 
important conventions of the Reformation, in the 
religious collociuy of Marburg 1529, the Wittenbei^ 
Assembly of 1530, the convention of Schmalkald 
1537, the negotiations in Frankfort and Nuremberg 
1539, and the convention of Hagenau 1540. In 
153S he went to England with Franz Burkhardt 
and Georg von Boyneburg in order to discuss the 
articles of the Augsburg (onfession with the theo- 
logians of Henry VIII. He was successful in intro- 
ducing the Reformation in Saxony after the death 
of Duke George in 1539, at first in his beloved 
Annaberg, then in Leipsic, where he preached the 
first Evangelical sermon in the Church of St. Nicolai. 
The princes left him there that he might carry 
through the work of the Reformation; he remained 
nine months, meeting an obstinate and violent op- 
po^ition, but finally mastered the situation. He 
won the affection of the citizens to such a degree 
that Elector John Frederick was asked to leave 
him there two years, but in 1540 he returned to his 
congregation. His health had always been very 
delicate and imequal to his arduous tr.sks. Owing 
to overexertion on the occasion of the Thuringian 
visitations, he was comiwlled after the year 15,39 
to interrupt his labors from time to time, especially 
as he developed broncliial troubles. 

Few characters of the Reformation appeal to the 
sympathy as strongly as does Myconius. Like 
Luther, he had attained the light and truth of the 
Gospel by personal experience. His character had 
been firmly fixed early in life and could not be 
unsettled by the theological disputes and opinions 
of the time. Tn Luther he recognized with glad- 
ness from the beginning •* the chosen man of God 
anrl the last Elijah," and his devotion to Melanch- 
thon was not less sincere. The purity of his charac- 
ter was undisputed and secured him the respect of 
friend and foe. In spite of his efficiency in the 
Latin and German tongues and his popular gifts, he 
did not aspire to the fame of a \sTiter or scholar, 
but exerted his acti\ity in the practical woric of 
the church. Nevertheless, he has left some treatises 
which are still valuable, as, for instance, Wie man 
iiiv (infcUUjen und /ionderlich die krancken, tm Chria- 
Inithumb mterrirhien soil (Wittenbeig, 1630; new 
ed., Frankfort, 1598, enlaiiged by the tmtiM W^ 

man mit den heseuenen Leuten umgehen aoU). 
Whenever the condition of his throat prevented 
him from preaching, he busied himself with search- 
ing the archives of the church, of monasteriesy 
and the hospital, and published extracts of them 
under the title Neues Erbbuch und Kopey der Afin- 
istratur 154B and wrote his Historia Re/onnaUoniM 
1517-42, both extant in manuscript in the archducal 
library at Gotha. This history reflects his experi- 
ences and impressions in an unpretentious, but fresh 
and plastic manner, and is the valuable contribu- 
tion of a contemporary of the events. 

(G. Kat^'Erau.) 
Bibuographt: His lluioria ReformtUionia contaios many 
biographical details. Biographies were written by A. 
Probus, Schmalkalden, 1597; M. Adam, Frankfort. 1705; 
Juncker, Walterehausen, 1730; J. G. Bos^eck, Leiptle, 
1739; C. K. G. Lommatnch, Annaberg, 1S25: K. F. 
Ledderhose, Gotha, 1854; M. Meurer, Leiixiic. 1864 (con- 
tains an excellent list of literature); G. KreyenberK, in 
Greruboterit 1S92, i. pp. 114 sqq,; and P. ScherflSg, Leipsic 
1900. Consult also: H. £. Jacobs, Martin Luthfr, pp. 65- 
66, 79, 117. 287, New York, 1S98; J. W. Richard. Pkaip 
Mdanchthon, pp. 159, 254, 280, ib. 1898. 

MYCONIUS, OSWALD: Swiss reformer; b. 
at Lucerne 1488; d. at Basel Oct. 14, 1552. His 
original nfime was GeisshUsler. After completing 
his education at Basel, where he became acquainted 
with Zwingli, Holbein, and Erasmus, he became a 
teacher at the canons' school at Zurich in 1516. 
Here he published two pamphlets in one of which 
(1518) he held that the pope must be obeyed only 
BO long as he required nothing contrary to Chris- 
tianity. He took a decbive part in the calling of 
Zwingli to Zurich. Shortly afterward Myconius 
was called to teach in his native city, but he con- 
tinued to correspond with his lifelong friend 
Zwingli. In 1522 his views forced him to retire 
from his position. After teaching for a time at 
Einsicdcln he returned to Zurich, primarily as 
teacher at the school attached to the FraumQnster. 
Here he held German lectures on the New Testa- 
ment, besides taking a silent though active part in 
all the measures of Zwingli. To this period belong! 
his Ad ancerdotes HelvetuB qui Tigurinis male fo- 
quuntur etmsoria id male loqui deeinant (1524). In 
1531 Myconius was called to the chureh of St. 
Albans at Basel and in 1532 he was appointed the 
successor of (Ecolampadius (q.v.). Though he ac- 
cepted this only on condition that he might resign 
as soon as one more worthy could be found, he con- 
tinued to discharge the double office of head of the 
Basel church and professor of theology until his 
death. He was involved in many difficulties, how- 
ever, by Carlstadt (q.v.), who formed a faction in 
the faculty to subordinate the church to the uni- 
versity, only to be defeated by Myconius; and 
when the latter sought to cany out the refonnatoiy 
measures of (Ecolampadius, Caristadt declared to 
the council that his rival wished to make the dvii 
authorities slaves of the priests, and told the peo- 
ple that Myconius disapproved all their pleasure. 
Despite this the prestige of Myconius increased 

In the eucharistic question, while TCmaining gen- 
erally in aocord with the Zwingliain position, m ii 
oleftr fram his lettsn and from his oommentaiy ckk. 
J- U^, l^yocniiis appraomated Iriithe^i' 





In eertain rogarda. In the first Helvetic Confession, 

dimwn up in 1536, he accordingly termed the Lord's 

Siqyper a mystic meal, and spoke of eating the flesh 

and drinking the blood of Christ not as perishable 

physical food but as nourishing eternal life. He 

sought, moreover, to reconcile Luther and Z>%'ingli 

in their eucharistic views, and pursued a similar 

course in the Osiandrian controversies. The most 

distinguished pupil of Myconius was Theodor Bib- 

liander (q.v.), to whose edition of the letters of 

CEeolampadius and Zwingli (Basel, 1536) Myconius 

contributed a first brief life of Zwingli (printed in 

the Vita quatuor reformaiarum, ed. Neander, Ber- 

in, 1841). (Emil Eouf.) 

Bcmliookafbt: W» oormpondenoe with Zwingli is printed 
in the Opera of the latter, vols. vii«— viii. Biographies are 
by If. Kiiehofer, Zurich, 1813; and K. R. Hagenbach, 
EDMcfeld. 1850 (contains also the principal minor writings 
of Myconius). Further notices will be found in the litera- 
ture dealing with the Reformation in Switseriand, also in 
the biographies of Bullinger. (Ecolampadius, and Zwingli. 
GiMMnlt: Schaif, Chrutian Church, vii. 215 sqq.; T. and 
F. Platter, Sitteno^aeMehU dea 16. Jahrhunderta, ed. H. 
Boos. Leipsic 1878; S. M. Jackson, Huldreieh Zwingli, 
I, New York. 1903. 

MTHSTER, minister, JAKOB PETER: Danish 
bishop; b. at Copenhagen Nov. 8, 1775; d. there 
Jan. 30, 1854. He studied theology at the nniver- 
aty of his native city, and became pastor at Spjel- 
lerup, on the island of IZealand, in 1802; first 
i»Kapliiin at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen 
in 1812; privat-^iocent in psychology in the theo- 
logical seminaiy at Copenhagen in 1813, and court 
preacher in 1826. During his career in the Danish 
metropolis he published a voliune of Kleine Theo- 
logiache SchrtfUn (in German, Copenhagen, 1825), 
which gives evidence of his knowledge of esthetic 
and philosophical literature, as well as of church 
history. In 1834 he was appointed bishop of Zea- 
land, in which capacity he officiated until his death. 
During his incumbency of the bishopric the relig- 
iooB movement caused by the appearance of Grundt- 
▼ig (q.v.) agitated the Danish Chiurch, and Myn- 
ster, who had no sympathy with the former's ideas 
of religious liberty, became one of his most ardent 
opponents. Grundtvig, however, succeeded in 
preventing the introduction of a revised ritual 
proposed by Mynster, and as the teachings promul- 
gated by the former found more and more adher- 
ents the old bishop found it impossible to stem the 
tide of liberalism, and he gradually gave up the 
struggle, devoting himself to literary pursuits. He 
published numerous collections of sermons, and a 
woik entitled '' Thoughts on Christian Dogmas " 
(2 vols.. Germ, transl., Hamburg, 1840), which for 
a long time remained popular both in Denmark 
and Germany. A cdlection of his writings in 6 
▼ola. i^peared at Copenhagen in 1852-57; collec- 
tions of his letters in 1860-66; an autobiography 
in 1864 (2d ed., 1898); and a volume of sermons, 
1875. (F. NiELSBNt.) 

Bduooupst: Beskles the autobiography and letters 
above, oonnilt: C. L. N. Mjmster, *' Reminis- 
' Oopenhagen, 1877. Further literature in Danish 
in Hauck-Hersog, RE, ziii. 609. 

logian; b. in Gothenburg Apr. 26, 1824; d. at Upsala 
Mar. 22, 1899. He received his education at the 
VIII.— 6 

University of Upsala (B.A., 1841; Ph.D. and 
candidate in theology, 1851); was appointed pro- 
fessor of exegesis there 1866, and resigned 1892. 
He was an able and independent exegete of the 
Biblical-theological school, being influenced by J. T. 
Beck and by Sdren Kierkegaard (qq.v.). For him 
faith received its justifying power as the most pro- 
found ethical act; justification is gained not by 
imputation but by man's appropriating it; and he 
stressed not Christ's suffering and death but his 
personality, which was perfected through suffering 
and death. He assailed the Lutheran doctrine of 
atonement and justification, and took part in the 
controversy called out by the teaching of Walden- 
strom (q.v.) on the atonement which was diffused 
throughout Sweden and entered the United States. 
Among his works are Den ignelUka thealogien (1862) ; 
Bidrag til en bibelsk theologi (1863); Inledning tU 
Romarebrefvet (1868); Om aposteln Petrus och den 
dldsta kyrkans fdUka gnosis (1865); Patdi href til 
Romarena (1871); Den hei. Shrifts Idra omfdrsonin- 
gen (1874); Sal&mos Ordsprik (1875); De paulinr- 
ska brefven (2d ed., 1883); De apostoliska bre/ven 
of Jakob, Petrus, Judas och Johannes (1883) ; during 
1864-69 he edited the periodical Vittnet, and after 
1884 Bibelforskaren, which among other things con- 
tains his admirable translation of Isaiah, and his 
interesting commentary on Revelation. 

John O. Evjbn. 

UTRRH: The fragrant gum of Balsamoden- 
dron myrrha, a tree or shrub growing chiefly in 
Arabia and Ethiopia, but not in Palestine, where its 
use was a luxury (cf. Matt. ii. 11). The gum, at 
first oily and then fluid, is primarily a yello^vdsh 
white; but it hardens into reddish drops or kernels 
with a peculiar balsam smell and bitter taste. The 
best kind flows partly of itself. Generally the bark 
of the tree was incised to obtain the myrrh, which 
was exported from Arabia to the West especially 
by Nabatseans and Phenicians, who frequently 
adulterated it and doubtless sometimes substituted 
similar gimis from other trees. Myrrh was used as 
incense (Cant. iii. 6), to perfume clothing and beds 
(Ps. xlv. 8; Prov. vii. 17; Cant. i. 13), as an un- 
guent (Ex. XXX. 23; Esther ii. 12; Cant. v. 5), 
and in pulverized form for embalming (John xix. 39), 
whence most of the Chiuxh Fathers interpreted 
the myrrh of Matt. ii. 11 as a symbol of the siiffer- 
ing and death of Christ. Myrrh was also mingled 
with wine to impart to it an aromatic flavor and to 
render it less intoxicating; but the '' wine mingled 
with myrrh " of Mark xv. 23 was probably the 
sour wine of the Roman soldiers mingled with some 
bitter ingredient to produce stupefaction (cf. Matt, 
xxvii. 34). (R. Kittkl.) 

Biolxoo&ipht: See under Mtbtlb. 

MTRTLE: A tree about ten feet high, growing 
in the valleys and on the shores, as well as on 
heights not altogether devoid of moisture (cf. Neh. 
viii. 15), in Asia, whence it was transplanted to 
Greece and Italy. Its perfume and beauty, en- 
hanced by its smooth, evergreen leaves and white 
flowers, made it a favorite adornment of gardens 
(cf. Isa. xli. 19, Iv. 13), though it also grew wild in 
Palestine (Neh., ut sup.). Oil and a sort of wine 

HystAffoglMkl Theoloffy 



were prepared from its black berries (Vergil, Gcor- 
gicQf i. 106; Pliny, Hist. naturaHSf xv. 35-38, xxiii. 
44) ; and its branches formed decorations of houses 
and rooms on festal occasions, as at the Feast of 
Tabernacles (Neh., ut sup.). The classics also show 
that myrtle branches were strewn in the way, and 
garlands of myrtle were worn at feasts, especially 
at marriage feasts since the myrtle was sacred to 
Aphrodite and the symbol of conjugal love. The 
name Hadassah, " Myrtle," was thus appropriate 
as the name of a beautiful girl, and was the orig- 
inal appellation of Esther (Esther ii. 7). 

(R. KiTTEL.) 

Bzbuograpbt: G. Hart, Fauna and Flora of Sinai, Pelrae, 
etc., London, 1901-05; M. Callcott. Scripture Herhal, 
ib. 1842; H. H. Oibom. Plants of the Holy Lanrf, Phila- 
delphia, 1860; H. B. Tristram, Fauna and Flora of Paiet- 
tine, London, 1884; G. E. Post, Flora of Syria, Palestine, 
and Syria, Beirut, 1896; C. Jorct. in L'Orient clasaiQue, 
1897, p. 355; G. Hcnslow. Plants of the Bible, ib. 1906; 
Vigouroux, Dirtionnaire, faac. xxvii., cols. 1363-67. 


** Myfltafcogia." Cyril of Jerusalem (( 1). 
Dionysius the Am>pugite (S 2). 
Works Antedating Theodore of Andida (( 3). 
Theodore of Andida and Othera (§4). 
Later Eastern and Western Treatises (§5). 

A term " Mystagogical Theology " was used to 
denote a form of disciplinary theology that was 
cultivated principally in the Eastern Church in the 
early Byzantine age, but also in the Middle Ages, 
and later in Russia. It conveys the sense of the 

church ceremonial not in the light of 

I. " Mysta- historic science but Jis having a ** secret 

gogia." meaning." As used in ancient Greek, 

Cyril of myatagogia signifies the sacred iiiitia- 

Jerusalem. tion into the ** mysteries," either l)y 

actual admission to the sacred so- 
lemnities or by theoretical admission through in- 
struction. Whatever introduces to a mystery is a 
mystagogia; the priest who performs or conducts 
the process is a '' mystagogue," as Ls the theologian 
who correctly expounds it and embodies its true 
sense (which is primarily a secret) in the form of 
" doctrine." The sacred process is itself a mysta- 
gogia, since it initiates into the region of divine 
wonders. Above every other ecclesiastical solem- 
nity, the Eucharist is accounted a mystagogia, in- 
deed it is termed expressly " the mystagogia." In 
general, however, mystagogical theology has ex- 
amined everything pertaining to the divine offices, 
and has discovered a secret meaning in every part 
of them. The earliest mystagogical work known is 
the '* Mystagogical Catechetics " by Cyril of Jeru- 
salem (q.v.), dating from about the middle of the 
fourth century. This is in five sermons, wherein 
Cyril further explains to the neophytes, to whom 
he has already delivered the creed in the course of 
eighteen sermons, who have also been baptized 
accordingly, the additional sacred operations which 
they have undergone, together with the hdiy cere- 
monies in which they have now shared for the first 
time. It is presupposed that the catechumens were 
as yet not rightly aware of what was to oome about 
in them when they received baptism^ nor how the 
Eucharist, to which they were to be a dm itted for 
the first time after b^>tiBai9 waa BeMamti 

what this celebration altogether signified. Cyril 
elucidates only a few details in a really mystagog- 
ical sense and in the simplest terms of statement. 
'* Symbolic " and " dogmatic " explanations occur 
interchangeably. That is to say, Cyril felt no less 
obliged to set clearly before the newly baptized 
members the matter in question, the renewal they 
have undergone, especially to render them con- 
scious of the fact that the bread and wine were the 
body and the blood of the Lord, than to exhibit 
the rites and the forms, which they have seen and 
shared, in their intrinsic significance; in other 
words, he aimed to present those rites on their ob- 
jective side, yet as themselves conveying the sense 
of their process. The main outline of presentation 
is the idea that the " renewal " involved a gradual 
progress, and that this was discernible in the rites 

The proper founder of mystagogical theology, 
broadly considered, was Dionysius the Areopagite 
(q.v.), a man of whom little is known, save that he 
probably belonged to the close of the fifth centuiy 

and was active in Syria. The work c^ 

2. DionjTsius special interest here is " Concerning 

the the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy " (MPG, 

Areopagite. iii. 369 sqq.; Eng. transl. by John 

Parker, London, 1894). What in this 
is significant in respect to the expository feeling 
of the early Church is that the whole visible en- 
tity and activity of the " hierarchy," that is, the 
Church in its vitul agency, is represented as being 
filled with mysteries and wonders; and if one be 
but correctly initiated, these, perchance, can be 
everywhere seen " shining through." Dionysius 
made it clear that '* dogma ■ ' is possessed of a mir- 
rored counterpart in ceremonial worship. In later 
times, the ceremonial was not infrequently treated 
as a criterion for a ** new " doctrine; the same being 
discarded unless there appeared to be something 
congruent in the rites. Conversely, it is a special 
question just how far the rites and sacramentals 
became gradually adapted to the dogma already 
current, with symbols to fit the occasion. As Dio- 
nysius will have it, the terrestrial hierarchy is a 
copy of the celestial. Just as the angels, in gradu- 
ated circles, throng round about the one only God, 
even so the clergy on earth encompass the one 
bishop. The latter is quite peculiarly " a divine 
and godly man." From him do the priestly per- 
sons receive their divine consecrations, whereby 
they become qualified to " divinify " men. Dio- 
nysius treats of the principal ecclesiastical myste- 
ries. A brief description of the given transaction is 
invariably followed by a survey of the emblematical 
character of its rites in detail. The object is to 
elucidate the intrinsic nature of the clergy, to ex- 
plain its direct significance in connection with the 
transaction concerned; again, the same as touch- 
ing the " faithful." For instance, in his " PriestJIy 
Ordinances ** or acts of consecration for clerical 
oflSees, Dionydus shows that both the " unity " of 
the hierarchy is represented, and the gradatioa 
betweeu bishop, priest, and Ktuigist (deacon). Iz^ 
the ease of baptfam one may diaoera illumzoatiot^ 
far ita amhlwnatfa inqwrt^ aa one peieelTes how tKai^ 

tar torafaig wertwaid and befaydi^ 



lCyBt«90ffloal Theology 

robed for the act of renunciation, tiien by facing 
eafltwmrd and steadfastiy gaxing in this direction 
while confessing the faith, is led over from the sphere 
of the HghtJewB to that of the light. 

The next important mystagogue was Maximus 
GoofesBor (q.v.)> whose interpretation of the 
Eucharist, found in MPG, xci. 657 sqq., supplies 
what Dionysius omitted, a mystagogical elucida- 
tion of the Church as congregation. In so far as 
the Church embraces all " sorts and conditions of 
men," it is fairly a '' type and image " of God, a 
copy of his fulness and diversity, though in unity 
inherent. Maximus furthermore contemplates the 
Church as a structure; for if one surveys its typical 
ecMnpartments aright, the Church is at once a mys- 
terious depiction of the universe, and an image of 
man and his constituent parts. In chap. viii. Maxi- 
mus reaches his distinctive theme, the Eucharist. 
He reviews the entire course thereof; the priest's 
cntnmoe into the Chiurch represents Christ's ap- 
pearing in the flesh, the entrance of the people in- 
dieatee the separation of the faithful from the un- 
believing, the closing of the doors points to the end 
of the world and the judgment, which only those 
worthily transformed into the woiid of divine rea- 
son can enter securely. 

Next to be considered are the writings which deal 
particularly with a historical and symbolical con- 
struction of the Eucharist; that is, those the ra- 
tional continuity of which has evolved the theory 
as to the so-called dramatic character of the liturgy. 
But here many literary questions re- 
3. Works main to be settied before the develop- 

Antedating ment becomes thoroughly clear. It 
Theodore was long believed that Sophronius of 

of Amiida. Jerusalem was the founder of this the- 
oiy. But the Russian scholar Kras- 
noeeljcev has shown this to be an error. It is owing 
to him, again, and to F. E. Brightman, that an im- 
portant man in the history of mystagogical theol- 
ogy has of late been to some extent newly recovered 
to knowledge, namely, Theodore of Andida. But 
in Older to keep the literary sequence firmly in 
mind, one must pause at this point to consider a 
work entitled " Mystagogical Church Lore." This 
has been ascribed to many authors, and a really 
critical edition on the basis of the many manu- 
scripts available is still lacking. Pitra communi- 
cated a fragment of a Latin translation prepared by 
Anastasius Bibliothecarius (q.v.); while from the 
letter to Emperor Charies the Bald, appended by 
Anastasius to this document, it appears that in 
Constantinoi^ at that time, the Patriarch Ger- 
manus I. (d. 730) was deemed the author. It is 
entir^ possible that this tradition is correct. The 
work itself underwent many reconstructions. 
Whether the shortest form, published by Miller 
after a Codex Bodlejanus et Magdaleneruia (in his 
edition of the works of Qyril of Jerusalem, pp. 325- 
332, Oxford, 1703), is the eariiest, is undecided. 
The one in MPO, xcviii. 384r453, is certainly late 
and gfeatiy enlarged. In the explanation of the 
liturgy which this work presents, the thought is 
dominant that the celebration of the Eucharist re- 
veals the entire life of the Lord. The priest repre- 
sents Christ himself; indeed his veiy vestments are 

so fashioned that Christ is to be discerned therein. 
Originally the design appears to have been limited 
to the priestiy symbolizing (in visible ritual acts) 
of Christ in his passion, death, and resurrection. 
But ultimately the conception so far expands that 
practically the whole history of Jesus Christ be- 
comes illustrated in the acts and actors of the lit- 
urgy. Even the manner in which the priest holds 
his fingers, while blessing the people at the close, 
has its symbolism, and announces the event of 
Christ's coming again, and of the end of the world. 
It is Theodore of Andida who turns the construc- 
tion so as to cover the whole history of Christ. Who 
Theodore was, is totally uncertain; Andida the 
place is supposed to be situated in Asia Minor. 

Theodore may belong to the twelfth, 

4* Theodore if not to the eleventh, century. He is 

of Andida acquainted with the work just noted, 

and Others, and holds it to be a work of Basil of 

Csesarea. His own treatise is entitied 
"Summary Review of the Symbols and Mysteries 
Occurrent in the Divine Liturgy " (cf. A. Mai, Nova 
patrum bibliothecaf vi. 2, pp. 547-^584, 8 vols., Rome, 
1852-71; and MPG, cxl. 417-468). Theodore (some 
codices call him ** Nicholas ") is a learned man. 
He remarks that ** many priests were aware that 
the various acts in the liturgy aimed to set forth 
the Lord's passion, etc., not only according to its 
effects, but also to depict, as in a figure, the very 
manner thereof; save that there was no doubt but 
that those liturgical acts exhibited likewise the 
entire earthly career of Jesus." The holy table, 
whereon the sacrifice is prepared, can certainly be 
regarded as the " grave," but is also expected to re- 
call the " manger." The bread is naturally a "type* 
of the body of Christ, but also of Mary, in so far as 
she conceives the Word by power of the Holy Ghost," 
whereas the deacon also ** salutes " the bread, even 
as the angel greeted Mary. Where the deacon with- 
draws from the " table of preparation " the Lord 
abides there in the stillness of retirement and se- 
clusion; these being the thirty years of Christ's 
" obscmity." Then the priest comes actively for- 
ward: his first '' ingress " into the Church repre- 
sents the preaching Christ; his second entrance, 
with the bread and wine, exhibits Jesus on his way 
to death. The vestments have manifold significance 
(see Vestments and Insignia, Ecclesiastical). 
Theodore's entire treatise is full of subtle, often 
brilliant, phantasy. Its manner of interpretation 
dominated all the succeeding era; and its theory 
has come to be officially binding. A treatise to be 
correctiy appraised only upon due acquaintance is 
the one associated with Sophronius of Jerusalem 
(d. 638), and formerly held to be genuine: " Ac- 
count (Comprising the Entire Ecclesiastical His- 
tory" (MPG, Ixxxvii., pp. iii., 3981 sqq.). This 
work is a combination of the primitive ^' Mystagog- 
ical Church Lore " and of Theodore's ** Simmiary 
Review." The various mystagogical writings men- 
tioned above are of moment in that they reveal 
the development of the liturgy in general. Yet 
they have not been adequately valued by lituigical 
scholars either as sources to determine the gradu- 
ating distinctions or different successive phases in 
the history of liturgy, or as governing the relative 

Mystaffogloal Theology 


status of the traditional litui^cal forms. In fact, 
the mystagogical theory often affords the possibility 
of ascertaining what is old and what is new mate- 
rial. Especially are the many quotations from 
prayers, lections, etc., of value for critically collating 
the manifold litui^cal texts. 

The most renowned mystagogues of the Middle 

Ages were the two metropolitans of Thessalonica, 

Nikolaos Kabasilas (q.v.) and Sim- 

5. Later eon (q.v.). The former is the more 
Eastern and ingenious, being comparable for acumen 

Western to Theodore of Andida, whose mode of 

Treatises, contemplation he specifically contin- 
ued, particularly the thought that the 
liturgy visibly presents the entire incarnation of 
the Logos. But it were leading us too far afield to 
examine his work in detail. £Us " Interpretation 
of the Divine Liturgy " is found in MPG, cl. 368 
sqq. Simeon is of much slighter compass; for him 
the external is everywhere the most engaging, the 
separate pieces of clerical vestments, their form, 
color, etc. The line of " Dionysius the Areopagite," 
Maximus Confessor, Theodore of Andida, Nicholas 
Kabasilas, is the line par exceUence, that of the real 
thinkers; the second rank, to which Simeon be- 
longs, is that of the dilettanti. Howbeit, Simeon 
suited the taste of his time, and owes it to this cir- 
cumstance that he came to be the most popular 
mystagogue, the one whose name continues thor- 
oughly current. In the form of a dialogue he dis- 
cussed both dogmas and rites, besides composing 
tracts of a mystagogical nature (cf. A/PG, civ. 61- 
536). In his case, the drama of the liturgy comes 
to be a mere spectacular exhibition, " performed," 
in a sense, by puppets. The more modem era has 
also produced its mystagogues. In the second half 
of the sixteenth century flourished Johannes Na- 
thanael (in Venice and Constantinople); later, 
Nicholas Bulgaris (close of the seventeenth century; 
not to be confused with Eugenius Bulgaris, q.v.), 
though he published simply what his brother Chris- 
todulos (a priest on the island of Corfu) had writ- 
ten. But the Russian literature is more important 
in this direction than the modem Greek. Among 
works that have become very well known may be 
mentioned the " Letters on the Divine Offices of 
the Eastem Church " by Ludovicus of Muralt (1838) ; 
the '* Elucidation of the Divine Offices of the Eastr- 
em Church in the Light of their Symbolical Mean- 
ing," by Philaretus (archbishop of Tchemigov, in 
his " History of the Church of Russia "; Germ, 
transl. by Blumenthal, i. 369 sqq., Frankfort, 1872); 
the " Meditations on the Divine Litiu^," by the 
illustrious poet Gogol (Germ, transl. in A. V. Malt- 
zew, Liturgikon, Berlin, 1902). An inexhaustible 
wealth of imagination has been educed among the 
Russians by the liturgy, and the entire round of the 
Church solemnities. In the Western Church cer- 
tain attempts are not wanting in the way of con- 
struing ceremonial worship in a mystagogical or 
symbolic sense. Only in the West this matter is 
hardly taken so seriously as in the East. There is 
much freer play in the East in this connection than 
in the West, where the great mystagogues are but 
paired with the great dogmatists. 

F. Kattbnbubch. 

Bibuoorapht: Beaides tbe literature under the 
articles in this work on the individuab named in the loi 
consult: W. Gass, Die Myatik des Nikolaua Caba$Qa$, pp^ 
155 sqq., Qreifswald* 1840; idem, SvnUxdik der gHmkt 
aehen Kirche, pp. 298 sqq., Berlin, 1872; Stdts. in /db» 
hOcher fUr detUache TheOogie, vols, ix.-ziii (18M-e8}; 

E. Le Grand. Bibliographie hdUnique, Paris, 1885 hhj 

F. Kattenbusch, L^fbuch der vergleichenden Konfemmf 
kunde, i. 335 sqq., 350 sqq., 393 sqq., 491 sqq., FrAvqb 
1892; F. E. Brightman, Litwroiee Eaaiem and ffotoi, 
pp. xciii.-xcv., London, 1896; P. Meyer, Die Ikeotaptdi 
Litteratur der ffriechiachen Kirche, Leipsic, 1890; Ihtm, 
in TSK, Ixxiii (1900), 480-488; Krumbacber, OeKkidH, 
consult index under tbe names of the individuals named li 
the text. 

MYSTERIES, TRIBAL. See Tribal Mtbteub; 
and Comparative Religion, VI., 1, b, { 5. 


I. Definition and Description. 
Essential Character (f 1). 
Relation to Relifpon (12). 
Attainment of Mystical Cionditions (i 8). 
II. History. 

In the East (} 1)- 

Scholastic and Monastic Mysticism (f 2), 

Eariy Protestant Mysticism ($3). 

Post-Reformation Roman C^atholic MyBtaeina (i 4). 

Late Protestant Mysticism (} 5). 

Mysticism in England (16). 

In America (f 7). 

L Definition and Description: Like many other 

psychological concepts, mysticism scarcely admit! 

of rigid definition, since its elements, though rooted 

in the individual soul, so cross with other elementB 

in the course of the development of 

I. Essential each person, and give rise to such com- 

Character, plex phenomena, that exact delimita- 
tion becomes impossible. To gain evoi 
an approximate notion of mysticism, a HigtiiM*t¥" 
must first be drawn, a number of elements must be 
eliminated, particularly all that results from senas- 
perception, and all that may be deduced from soefa 
perception by dialectics in the widest sense of ths 
term. When, on the other hand, from external per- 
ceptions feelings arise which can not logically be 
deduced from such perceptions, but can arise ody 
through the cooperation of the peculiar flpirituil 
organism of man, such feelings may be tenned 
mystical. Mysticism has its real beginning, there- 
fore, when the mystical element becomes ascendent 
over man in connection with the world that sur- 
rounds him, and when his soul seeks to be in hax^ 
mony with the universe that encompasses it^ or, 
more accurately, with the Supreme, however this 
Supreme be conceived. The way in which the ends 
of mysticism are acquired is primarily self-intro- 
spection. It is true tiiat there is here an element 
of human cooperation and will, but since the wiU is 
imable of itself to produce the inner experience 
which it desires, but needs to be met by a divine 
grace which both purifies and illumines the soul, 
mysticism involves the concept of revelation, and 
thus comes into relation with religion. 

All religion depends on revelation of some sort, 
real or assumed, and this revelation, independent 
of human will yet authoritative for future genersr 
tions, is transmitted by tradition. When, how> 
ever, religion depends only on historicity and twi- 
dition, it becomes barren, legalistic, and lifeless. 
It accordingly needs a third element if it is to bo- 


Mystaffo^oal Theology 

a living thing to the individual. This is found 
in personal, inward experience, which is itself a 
secondary fonn of revelation, yet is 
X Relation accessible to all who believe the author- 
to Religion, itative revelation. This element of 
personal experience, which is essential 
to mysticism and without which religion can scarcely 
exist, forms the bond between mysticism and re- 
l%ioo. This imion is the closest in Christianity, 
vluch from the first has contained a strongly mys- 
tical element. From religion mysticism may receive 
tendencies at variance with its real nature, as the 
desire of peraecution; but, on the other hand, mys- 
tidam may oppose aberrations in religion. The lat- 
ter case is, however, comparatively rare. Mysticism 
may indeed oppose a purely external religion, yet it 
seldom attacks vitally what is definitely established 
by the religious body to which a given mystic be- 
longs. Before such definite principles mysticism 
bows, in conformity with its individual character 
as contrasted with the social character of religion. 
The mystic is essentially concerned with God and 
bis own soul, and if he be imdisturbed, he readily 
conforms to external ordinances. 

Mystical conditions may be induced by certain 
ifgencies. In the lowest stages certain narcotics 
may be employed, though these are utterly rejected 
by higher mysticism. Again, bodily 
3. Attain- movements and postures may be as- 
ment of sumed, as the whirling of dervishes or 
Mystical the immobility of Hesychasts (q.v.: 
Conditions, and see Ecstasy). The common agen- 
cies, however, are solitude, silence, 
asceticism, and concentration of thought on the di- 
vine. Among the agencies shared by both religion 
and mjrsticiam, prayer is preeminent. In the case 
of mysticism, such prayer is strictly inward, going 
■o far as to hold prayer expressed in words as of 
infericH* worth, and to maintAin that the only prayer 
idiich really pleases God and helps man is ** men- 
tal prayer," which utters no word, but expresses 
the inmost longing for God; so that later, especially 
in post-Reformation Roman Catholic mysticism, 
** prayer " came to connote the mystic state in gen- 
emL Certain phenomena highly valued by many 
are mistrusted and deemed of secondary worth by 
some of the greatest mystics, this category including 
viBOos, the hearing of voices, bilocation, levita- 
tion, etc., the reality of which can not be affirmed. 
lliat on which the great mystics lay stress is far 
diff ere n t; it is the release oi the soul from finite 
bonds and its conduct to inward conmumion with 
God. This oonmiimion may be construed as one of 
easenoe, the result being pantheistic mysticism; or 
it may be regarded as absolute surrender to God; 
and so slight is the distinction between the two 
views that it is often impossible to difltinguish out- 
wardly whether a given mystic is a pantheist or 
not. While human will and human endeavor pre- 
pare the way for the highest flights of mysticism, 
man ean not of himself produce them. They are a 
divine gift, which God grants to whom, when, and 
where be will, nor may all gain them who devote 
tbemsrives to the mystic life. Nevertheless, they 
form the goal of the mystic way. The stages in this 
way are mainly described eitJaer as "purgative,*' 

" iUimiinative," and " unitative," or as " medita- 
tion," " contemplation," and " mystic union." 
The former classification requires first the purify- 
ing of the soul from sinful wishes and acts; then, 
when a certain degree of perfection has been gained, 
illumination from God; and finally, ecstatic and 
complete union with God. In the second classifi- 
cation '^ meditation " is regarded as natural and 
humanly controlled reflection which is already di- 
rected toward the supreme goal; '' contemplation " 
bears man beyond the natural sphere through grace 
to higher and higher perfections, above which lies 
nothing but '' mystic union." A distinct form of 
mysticism is often thought to be found in quiet- 
ism, but this, strictly speaking, means simply the 
complete and permanent negation of the will, as 
in primitive Buddhism; and it requires a degree of 
submission which has conquered every impulse of 
the individual will, whereas true mysticism, despite 
its submission, by no means excludes struggle against 
individual nature and against individual will. 

n. History: Since Christian mysticism has re- 
received from the Christian religion many impres- 
sions and influences, as well as influences from other 
soiurces which have affected it and, 

X. In the through it, the mystical element of 
East the Christian religion, and even the 
history of that religion, a full history of 
Christian mysticism would require constant refer- 
ence to the development of the Church in general, 
as well as detailed discussion of the origin of each 
of the various mystical phenomena. Here only a 
survey of the main elements can be given. It is 
frequently denied that mysticism was present at 
the very beginning of Christianity, but such a view 
is erroneous. Mysticism is present in Paul (cf. 
Gal. ii. 20; Rom. viii. 22) as well as in John, and 
is also revealed in such early productions as the 
epistles of Ignatius of Antioch and in the *' Shep- 
herd " of Hennas. Meanwhile mysticism had re- 
ceived a peculiar development from without which, 
in itself alien to Christianity, nevertheless exer- 
cised a strong influence upon it. An important 
factor here was Philo of Alexandria (q.v.), whose 
teachings included unity with the Godhead (though 
man may gain it only temporarily and through 
ecstasy^ and the Logos (q.v.); Philo not only 
modified early Christianity, but also influenced, or 
at least was nearly akin to, Neo-Platonism (q.v.). 
These theories deeply impressed not only Origen 
and his school, but even his opponent, Methodius 
(q.v.). The fourth century, with its rise of monas- 
ticism, was highly important for mysticism, which 
was fostered by the solitude and meditation on the 
inner life practised by the higher class of monks, a 
remnant of this mystic contemplation being con- 
tained in the fifty homilies of Macarius (q.v.). All 
this was fiuther aided by the growth of Symbolism 
(q.v.) in the liturgy, admirably illustrated by the 
"Catechetical Lectures ' of Cyril of Jerusalem 
(q.v.); while, on the other hand, individual mys- 
ticism finds its influential representative in the 
" Ladder of Paradise " of Johannes Climacus (q.v.; 
see also Mtstaoooical Theologt). The period 
of conflict that racked the Chureh after the Council 
of Chalcedon witnessed one of the most remarkable 




phenomena in the reahn of mysticism — the pseudo- 
Dionysian writings (see Diontsius the Areopa- 
gite), which represent Neo-Platonism in Christian 
guise. The type of thought here set forth foimd its 
full development in the strictly orthodox Maximus 
Confessor (q.v.), who taught symbolic meaning for 
the entire litiugy and gave the pseudo-Dionysian 
writings their authorized position in the E^astem 
Chmtih. In the eleventh century a new element 
was first clearly introduced by Simeon the New 
Theologian (q.v.), whose teachings of a mystic light 
may well have given rise, despite many dififerences, 
to the peculiar doctrines of the Hesychasts (q.v.), 
themselves defended in one of the most important 
productions of the mysticism of the Eastern Chmt^h, 
the *^ Discourses of the Life in Christ " of Nikolaos 
Kabasilas (see Kabasilas). 

In the West, except for the mystical element 
present in occidental as well as in oriental Chris- 
tianity from the first, illustrated by passages in 
Tertullian and Cyprian, it was Augustine who laid 
the foundations for the mysticism of 
a. Scholastic later ages; although for a time he here 
and lacked followers, so that a long time 
Monastic elapsed before mysticism became an 
Mysticism, independent phenomenon in the the- 
ological literature of the western 
Church. [Anticipations of the coming intensity of 
interest in the inner Ufe are frequently to be dis- 
covered before the time of full bloom, as in the case 
of Ekkehard (known also as Ek;khart the Younger), 
a monk of St. Gall (c. 980-1036), who left a treatise 
on parts of the church service, benediction prayers, 
and also on the chronicle of St. Gall (in MOH, 
Script., ii. 76-147).] It was not until the twelfth 
century that mysticism became a real factor in the 
western Church. Here, as in the East, mysticism and 
monasticism were closely related, not only in Anselm 
and Peter Damian (qq.v.), but preeminently in Ber- 
nard of Gairvaux and Hugo of St. Victor (qq.v.). 
The characteristic element, new to a certain extent, 
in the mysticism of Bernard was the love of Jesus, 
particularly as the bridegroom of the soul, set forth 
in his homilies on Canticles. The position of Hugo 
of St. Victor, while in great measure the same as 
that of Bernard, was more scholastic and dialectic; 
and his positing of a fixed way by which the soul is 
to gain ultimate union with God forms the basis 
of that scholastic mysticism which mainly dom- 
inated the Middle Ages and was continued in the 
post-Tridentine Church of Rome. Victor's first 
distinguished successor was Richard of St. Victor 
(q.v.), and mention must also be made of Saint 
Hildegard of Bingen and Elizabeth of Sch5nau 
(qq.v.). It is not true, as is often stated, that there 
was a sharp cleavage between mysticism and scho- 
lasticism. Not only were such men as Hugo of St. 
Victor and Bonaventura equally distinguished in 
both fields, but even Thomas Aquinas had a strongly 
mystical vein in his theology. At the same time, 
a distinction was drawn between mysticism and 
scholasticism as two branches of theology — the 
latter essentially intellectual, formal, and philo- 
sophical; the former pietistic and teaching how to 
attain union with the divine, both often treating 
the same themes. The divergence of their methods 

and aims, however, rendered it poaedble for some, 
like Bernard, to be mystics only, others, like Hugo 
of St. Victor and Bonaventura, to work both in 
scholastic and in mystical theology, others, liks 
Abelard and Dims Scotus, to be scholastics cmly, 
and yet others, like Thomas Aquinas, to modify 
scholasticism with mysticism. From the twelfth 
century to the present day mysticism has retained 
a formal place in Roman Catholicism, which drawa^ 
nevertheless, a sharp distinction between " false " 
and " true " mysticism, honoring the latter and 
condemning the former. The mendicant orden 
essentially furthered mysticism. On the other 
hand, the Dominicans extruded a type of mysti- 
cism which was essentially German in representa- 
tives and characteristics, though finding at least a 
partial analogue in the teachings of the Dutch Jan 
van Ruysbroeck (q.v.) and his school. Among 
these men the bestrknown is Eckhart (q.v.), whoee 
chief scholars and successors were Heinrich Aman- 
dus Suso and Johann Tauler (qq.v.), and to this 
same school belonged the Theciogia Germanica (q.v.). 
Unlike the school of £>;khart, the Brethren of the 
Common Life (see Common Life, Brethren op 
the) not only maintained orthodoxy, but also 
stressed the practical ends of mysticism, this school 
producing the famous '' Imitation of Christ,'' usu- 
ally ascribed to Thomas k Kempis (q.v.). See also 
Friends of God. To the scholastic mystics of the 
fifteenth century belonged Dionysius the Carthu- 
sian and Nicholas of Strasbuig (qq.v.), while a theo- 
sophical and humanistic tendency was manifested 
by Nicholas of Cusa (see Cusa, Nicholas of), Gio- 
vanni Pico della Mirandola (see Pico della 
MiRANDOLA, Giovanni), Reuchlin (q.v.), and the 
fantastic Theophrastus Paracelsus and Agrippa von 
Nettesheim (q.v.). 

The Reformation gave to mysticism a new status, 
varying according to the dififerent communiona then 
formed. Of the Reformers Luther most occupied 

himself with it, and in his earlier career 

3. Early was most sjrmpathetic with it. He be- 

Protestant came more and more averse to the 

Mysticism. pseudo-Dionysius, but throughout hia 

life he highly esteemed Tauler and the 
Theciogia Oermanica (q.v.), while in his Euchaiistie 
doctrine he preserved a portion of Roman Catholie 
mysticism, this partially explaining the bitter spirit 
of his defenders, who felt, half-consciously, that 
they must defend this fragment of mysticism at 
any cost. Yet mysticism failed to maintain the 
recognized position that it had formerly held, and 
attempts were made to ignore, explain away, or 
excuse Luther's attitude. Dogmatism gained the 
supremacy, and although there were occasional 
manifestations of a mysticism that clung to ortho- 
doxy, Lutheranism gave but scant protection to 
the movement, which is most obvious in Lutheran 
hymnody. Neither Valentin Weigel nor Jakob 
Bohme (qq.v.) can be considered Lutheran mystics, 
though both maintained a Lutheran position. The 
former was rather inclined to pantheism, and his 
writings, posthumously published, were r^arded 
as a type of fanatical heresy and did much to dis- 
credit mysticism in the Lutheran Church. BOhme, 
who exercised considerable influence in England, 




was a theoaophist rather than a mystic, and his 
eooeeptB were developed on a non-Lutheran foun- 
dation. The Reformed Chiirch was far less favor- 
able to mysticism than was Lutheranism; Zwingli 
had no interest in it, Calvin hated it, and Reformed 
dogma and forms of worship were alike imf avor- 
able to it. In 1671 Gisbertus Voetius (q.v.) could 
declare tliat there was no mysticism in the Reformed 
Churehy yet he himself sought, in his ExercUia pie- 
iatU, to give a quasi-vindication of mjrsticism, only 
to advance no further than the lowest grade of the 
older system, and to make soimd mysticism end 
where the true mystics made it begin. Neverthe- 
leas, a series of Dutch theologians, partly his con- 
temporaries and partly belonging to the following 
generation, gave increased scope to mysticism, this 
number including Jan and Willem Teellinck, Jodo- 
eus van Lodenstejm, and Willem Schortinghuis 
(qq.v.), in whom certain basal concepts of Romance 
mysticism have been traced. Similar ideas may 
abo be found in the writings of the English Puritan 
Francis Rous (q.v.). In England, moreover, the 
writings of B6hme inspired a eystem of theosophy 
strongly mingled with visionary elements, repre- 
sented by John Pordage and Jane Lead (qq.v.), as 
well as by the latter's son-in-law Francis Lee, all 
of whom inspired the Philadelphian Society which 
found adherents in many places on the continent. 
And these writings even influenced the dry school 
of the Cambridge Platonists (q.v.). 

While mysticism thus found but scant recogni- 
tion in Protestantism, its position was far different 
in the Roman Catholic communion. In Spain just 
before the Reformation, mysticism-had 

4. Post- received a fresh impulse, expressed in 
Reformationthe Abeceriario espiritual of the Minorite 

Roman Francisco de Osuna, and shared by his 

Catholic brother Minorite, Pedro de Alcantara. 
Mysticism. At the same time, however, there arose 
the quietistic and antinomian Alom- 
brados (q.v.). While Juan d'Avila and Ignatius 
Loyola were acquitted, after trial by the Inquisition, 
of affiliation w^th this sect, the Jesuit foimder was 
strongly influenced by the new mysticism, which, 
duly regulated and conformed to doctrine and or- 
dinance, he determined to press into the service of 
the Church. Nevertheless, he forbade the devotion 
of the whole life to mysticism, which was restricted 
to certain times. The masterpiece here is his Ex- 
erciHa MpirituaHa (q.v.); and mysticism gave the 
Counterr^ormation some of its strongest sinews, 
and has exercised on the development of Romanism 
a force which is yet scarcely valued as it should be. 
About this same period there arose, through Fran- 
ciscan and Jesuit influence, a spirit of mysticism in 
the new congregation of Discsdced Carmelites, the 
great names here being Theresa (q.v.) and John of 
the Cross (see Carbcelites); and from Spain, espe- 
cially from the Carmelites, the new mysticism spread 
to France. Francis of Sales (q.v.) and Mme. de 
Chantal also belong here, despite the quietism of 
the latter. Decision concerning Miguel de Molinos 
(q.v.) is difficult, the problem being whether he 
valued mystical experiences so highly as to despise 
the sacraments of the Church, his condemnation, if 
such was his attitude, being justifiable from the 

Roman Catholic point of view. The question of 
disinterested love of God gave rise in France to the 
persecution of Mme. de Guyon (q.v.), who exercised 
an influence over German Protestants, and even 
over some in Switzerland. 

In a certain sense. Pietism (q.v.), the most im- 
portant movement in the German Church since the 
Reformation, furthered mysticism. Spener, while 
not himself a mystic, was not unfavor- 

5. Late able to the system, which he aided by 
Protestant commencing to break down dogmatic 
Mysticism, barriers. Both Johann Wilhelm Peter- 
sen and Gottfried Arnold (qq.v.) were 
closely associated with Pietism, and the latter did 
valuable service for the history of mysticism in 
the concluding portions of his great churoh history. 
To this same period belongs the Berleburg Bible 
(see Bibles, Annotated, I., § 3), and in the second 
decade of the century there arose, in distant con- 
nection with emigrants from the Cevennes, inspira- 
tion communities in the Wetterau (see Inspired, 
The). Mention should also be made, in this con- 
nection, of Gerhard Tersteegen (q.v.), who occu- 
pies an important position in the mysticism of all 
ages. The second half of the eighteenth century, 
with its prevailing Enlightenment (q.v.), which 
was fanatically hostile to all that was not obvious 
at first sight, was most unfavorable to mysticism. 
Nevertheless, even this period had such represen- 
tatives as Samuel Collenbusch, Jung Stilling, Jo- 
hann Caspar Lavater (qq.v.). Friedrich Christoph 
Getinger and Emanuel Swedenboi^ (qq-v.) were 
theosophists rather than mystics, while Philipp 
Matth&us Hahn and Johann Michael Hahn (qq.v.) 
occupied a middle ground. On the Roman Catholic 
side the chief place is due Johann Michael Sailer 

It might have been expected that the revolution 
in thought in the nineteenth century would have 
given a new impulse to mysticism, especially in 
view of the romantic movement. It is true that the 
name of mysticism was again honored; that the 
memory of such mystics as Eckhart and Jakob 
B6hme was revived; and that a superstitious and 
credulous Romish history of mysticism was written 
by Johann Joseph Gdrres (q.v.). Both Romanists 
and Protestants did much for the history of mys- 
ticism in this period, and in the former communion 
the theory of mysticism was still studied in tradi- 
tional fashion. All this, however, was the history 
and theory of mysticism, not mysticism itself. A 
real mystic, i.e., one who devotes himself to the 
mystic life and influences others mystically, can 
scarcely be found in the nineteenth century. The 
mystical spirit has not vanished, it is true, but the 
mystical life has disappeared. The reason prob- 
ably lies in the ever-increasing unrest of the time, 
which, though a consequence of the inevitable prog- 
ress of development, renders impossible that quie- 
tude and unworldly meditation which mysticism 
demands; yet it is not impossible that the time 
will come when, perhaps under new forms, mysti- 
cism will again arise and assert its rights. 

(S. M. DEUTSCHf.) 

English mysticism may be traced from Sir Thomas 
Browne (q.v.; Religio Medici) and Thomas Jack- 




son (q.v. 1 ; Being and Attributes of Ood), who had 
been steeped in Plato and the Alexandrian Neopla- 
tonism of Plotinus and Origen. The Cambridge 
Platonists (q.v.) Ralph Cudworth (q.v.; True In- 
ieUectxud System of the Universe) , Henry 

6. Mysti- More (q.v.; Simple Sayings) ^ and John 
cism in Smith (q.v.; " The Way or Method of 

England. Attaining Divine Knowledge/' and 
" On the Existence and Nature of 
God " in Select Discourses of John Smith, 4th ed., 
Cambridge, 1859), especially Smith, owed their 
mysticism more to Plotinus than to Plato. Along- 
side of this movement arose another under George 
Fox (q.v.), subject of many mystical experiences 
and founder of the Society of Friends (see Friends). 
In the eighteenth century the questions thrown up 
by the deistic controversy (see Deism) laid bare the 
essential opposition of two modes of thought — one 
basing religion ultimately on reason, in which the 
endeavor was made to come to an understanding 
with the Scriptures, authority, and the rational 
nature of Christianity, the other allying itself with 
the Quietists, F^nelon, and Madame Guyon, the 
Moravians, and the German mystics. The chief rep- 
resentative of the latter was William Law (q.v.; 
T}ie Way to Divine Knowledge) who kindled his 
torch at the flame of Jacob Boehme (q.v.). In the 
nineteenth century were Samuel Taylor Coleridge 
(q.v.) who was saturated with Plato, Schelling, and 
Jacobi, John Frederick Denison Maurice (q.v.), and 
among poets, William Wordsworth (q.v.; cf. Lines 
Composed a Few Miles above Tintem Abbey), and 
Arthur Tennyson (d. 1892; cf. The Higher Panthe- 
ism and The Ancient Sage). 

In America mysticism has appeared in Jonathan 

Edwards the Elder (q.v.). It was induced by his 

monistic metaphysics — God the only real Being, by 

his rare sense of the presence and 

7. In agency of God, by his intuitive esthetic 

America, appreciation of the divine excellency 
and beauty, by his prolonged and ex- 
haustive contemplation on the utter insignificance 
of man and his absolute dependence upon God, and 
by an emotional nature of surpassing richness for 
the most part held in check or suppressed by rigor- 
ous self-discipline (cf. " Diary," Works, i. 60-62, 
New York, 1829; sermon entitled " A Divine and 
Supernatural Light," etc., ib., vi. 171 sqq.; and A 
Treatise concerning Religious Affections, ib., vol. v.). 
In the last century mysticism was associated with 
the " Transcendental " movement in New England 
(see Transcendentalism; and cf., e.g., R. W. Emer- 
son, The Over-Soul and T?ie Method of Nature), due 
in great measure to the noetic or rational quality 
involved in it. More recently the psychological 
phenomena of mysticism are receiving attention, 
and experiments Tilth various kinds of intoxicants 
have been made with a view to ascertaining how 
far these are similar to true mystical states. The 
suggestion made by Prof. William James that mys- 
tical states may be " only sudden and great ex- 
tensions of the ordinary field of consciousness," 
where the question is raised whether in this expe- 
rience tracts of consciousness are actually uncov- 
ered or there is a true revelation of reality, is 
destined to stimulate to more painstaking and 

exhaustive inquiry on this obscure subject (cf . Jour- 
nal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Meifir 
ods, " A Suggestion About Mysticism," vol. vii., 
no. 4, pp. 85 sqq.). C. A. Beckwith. 

Bibuoorapht: An introduction to eastem mystiGiBSi is 
furnished by: £. H. Palmer, Orienial Myaticimn. A 
Treatise on the Stiffiatie and Unitarian Theoeophy «f (A« 
Peraiana, liOndon. 1867; W. S. Lilly, in Bdioiow Sua- 
tema of the World, London, 1893; C. H. A. Bjerrefaard, 
Sufi Interpretationa of . . . Omar Khayyam and FiUttrald, 
New York. 1902; F. Hadland Davia, The Peraian Myatica, 
London, 1907. Besides the literature under the aitides 
on the mystics named in the text, on western mystidam 
consult: W. R. Inge, Chriatian Myaticiamt London, 1899; 
idem, Studiea of Engliah Myatica, ib. 1907; idem, Peraonal 
Idealiam and Myatieiam, ib. 1907 (by a specialiat); R. A. 
Vaughan. Houra toith the Myatiea, New York, 1893 (a 
classic) ; J. D. Dalgaims, The Oerman MyaHea of the Fotar- 
teenth Century, London, 1850; I. A. Domer, Hiatory of 
Proieatant Theology, particularly in Oermany, Ekiinburffh, 
1871; J. Tulloch, Rational Theology and Chriatian PhUoao- 
phy in England in the Seventeenth Century, London, 1874; 
H. L. J. Heppe, Oeachiehte der quietiatiaehen Myatik m der 
katholiachen Kirche, Berlin, 1875; idem, Geachichte dea 
Piaiamua und der Myatik in der reformierlen Kirche, Lsyden, 
1879; Q. Matheson, Aide to the Study of Oerman Theology, 
Edinburgh, 1876; W. Preger, GeaehichU dea deutaehen 
Myatic im MittdaUer, Leipsic, 1881; J. Bigelow, MoUnoa the 
Quietiat, New York, 1882; W. Binder, /. K. Uippd, Der 
Freigeiat aua dem Pietiamua, Bonn, 1882; M. Ebner, M, 
Ebner und Heinrich von Ndrdlingen, Freibuig, 1882; 8. E. 
Herrick, Some Heretica of Yeaterday, London, 1884; J. Hunt, 
Hiatory of Religioua Thought in England, 3 vols., ib. 1884; 
F. Splittgerfoer, Aua dem innem Leben. Ein Beitrag aur 
chriatlichen Myatik, Leipdo, 1884; Q. d'Alviella, Cantam- 
porary Evolution of Religioua Thought in England, America 
and India, London. 1886; T. M.. Spaniah Myatiea, ib. 1886; 
E. Renan, Studiea of Religioua Hiatory, ib. 1886; C. du 
Prel, Die PhUoaophie der Myatik, Leipsic, 1885, Ehig. 
transl.. The Philoaophy of Myatieiam, London, 1888; J. 
Walker, Theology and Theologiana of Scotland, Edinbuzsh, 
18S8; Q. Visser, Hendrik Monde. Bijdrage tot de kenma 
der Noord-Nederlandache myatiek, Tlie Hague, 1880; 
Thomns k Vallgomera, Myatiea theologia divi Thomea, 
Augusts, 1890; F. Paulhan, Le Nouveau Myatidame, 
Paris, 1891; A. Auger, ^tude aur lea myatiquea dea Pay- 
Baa au moyen Age, Brussels, 1892; J. L. Adam, Le Mya^ 
iidame h la Renaiaaance, Paris, 1893; £. O. A. Merx, Idee 
und Orundlinien eirier Oeachiehte der Myatik, Heidelberg, 
1893; H. Schauerte, Myatik, Paderhom, 1894; A. lillie, 
Modifrn Myatiea and Modem Magic, New York, 1894; 
C. H. A. Bjerregaard, Lecturea on Myatieiam and Talka on 
Kindred Svbjeeta, ib., 1896; idem, Lecturea on Myatieiam 
and Nature Worahip, Chicago, 1897; V. Charbonnel, Lea 
Myatiquea dana la littirature prUente, Paris, 1896; C. Selt- 
mann, Angdua SQeaiua und aeine Myatik, Breslau, 1896; 
(cf. Angdua SUeaiua; Sdection from the Rhymea of a Oer- 
man Myatic; Trand. in the origirud Meter by Paul Carua, 
Chicago, 1909); J. F. Qrierson, Modem Myatieiam and 
Other Eaaaya, London, 1899; A. Peltser, DeuUche Myatik 
und deutache Kunat, Strasbuig, 1899; A. L. Thorold, An 
Eaaay in Aid of the Better Appreciation of Catholic 
Myatieiam, London, 1900; E. C. Gregory, An Introduc- 
tion to Chriatian Myatieiam, ib. 1901 ; idem, A LitUe Book 
of Heavenly Wiadom; Selectiona from Engliah Proae Mya- 
tiea, ib. 1904; C. Harrison, Notea on the Margina. An 
Enquiry into Myatieiam, ib. 1901 ; R. Steiner, Die Myatik 
im Aufgange der neuteitlichen Oeiatedebena, Berlin, 1901; 
W. James, Varieliea of Rdigioua Experience, chap, x., 
London, 1902 (valuable); R. Langenberg, QuelUn und 
Forachungen aur Oeachiehte der deutaehen Myatik, Bonn, 
1902; Juliana, an Anchorite of Norwich; XVI Revda- 
tiona of divine Love ahewed to Mother Juliana of Norwich, 
1S7S, London, 1902; J. Batteiger. Der Pietiamua in Bay- 
reulh, Berlin. 1903; E. A. Kemwart, Bibliothek berOhmter 
Mystiker, Leipsic, 1903 sqq.; W. P. Swainson, Chriatian 
Myatiea, London. 1903; W. R. Inge. Light, Life, and Love; 
Sdections from German myatiea of the Middle Agea, ib. 
1904; A. H. Bradford, The Inward Light, New York, 1905; 
W. R. NicoU. The Garden of NuU, With an Eaaay on 
Chriatian Myatieiam, London. 1905; S. H. Gem. Law and 
Chriatian Practice and Chriatian Myatieiam, Oxford, 1905; 




J. B. Shearer, Modem Myttidtm, New York, 1905; A. 
Hcftla'. BeiMiee xur Oeaehiehie der Mystik in der Reforma" 
tionaMeit, Berlin, 1006; A. E. Waite, Studies in Myttidam^ 
London. 1906; F. Pfeiffer. Dtutsehe Myatiker, Gdttingen. 
1907 eqq.; E. Recejao, Eutay on the Basis of Mystic 
KnowUdge, London, 1907; W. M. Soott, Aspects of Chris- 
tian Mysticism, ib. 1907; H. Delacroix, Etudes d^histoirs 
St de psyeKologie du mysticisme, Paris, 1908; F. Gieseoke, 
)iystik Jo. Baptist van HdnunUs {1577-1644)* Bdh- 
1908; F. von HOcel, The Mystical Element of Re- 

lioion as Studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and her 
Friends, Gdttingen, 1908; A. W. Hopldnaon, The Mystery 
of Mysticism, London, 1909; R. M. Jones, Studies in my*- 
tical Rdioion, ib. 1909; J. Paohen, Psycholooie des mys' 
tiques chritiens, Paris, 1909; Meister Eckhart's Sermons, 
Eng. transl. by C. Field, London, 1910; Scba£F, Chridian 
Church, V. 1 , pp. 636 sqq. 

MYTHOLOGY. See Compabativb Religion, V., 
§ 3, VL, §§ 7-8. 


KAASEHES. See Ophites. 


I. Earily History. 

Documentary Testimony (f 1). 
Racial Affinity (| 2). 
II. History from 312 B.C. 

Till the Roman Period (f 1). 
Under the Romans ($ 2). 
flignificauioe. Language, Religion (f 3). 

L Early History: The Nabatseans were a Sem- 
i^ people known at least as early as 312 B.C., in- 
habiting the region so long identified with the 
Edomites between the Dead Sea and 

X. Docu- the eastern arm of the Red Sea. 

mentary Whether they can be traced to a still 
Testimony, earlier time depends upon the inter- 
pretation of certain passages which 
are by most scholars taken as referring to this peo- 
ple. The passages in question are, first, those in 
the Old Testament which mention Nebajoth (first- 
bom of Ishmael; Gen. xxv. 13, xxviii. 9, xxxvi. 3; 
I Chron. i. 29; cf. Isa. Ix. 7, where the connection 
18 with Kedar, both peoples being pastoral, while 
the relationship is wholly congruent with the im- 
I^cations in Uie Genesis passages). It is to be 
noted that if the Nabateeans are meant in these 
passages, Arabic affinity is implied. The second 
class d passages are from the cuneiform inscrip- 
tions. Under the form Na-bct-ai-te is mentioned a 
pastoral people, associated with Kedar, on a cylin- 
der inscription of Asshurbanipal; their '' king " 
Natnu had taken part in an Arabic revolt against 
Aseyrian overiordship, and they had been punished 
by the Assyrian monarch. The inscription de- 
scribes them as living in a remote region. Other 
notices of them appear from the same general period 
in inscriptions made under Tiglath-Pileser, Sargon, 
and Sennacherib; but in these cases they are assigned 
to the Aramean stock. After these references the 
Nabatspans (if they are the people meant) are lost 
to sight, so far as reference to them goes, until 
312 B.C., after which notices become frequent. Thus 
Diodorus Siculus (Bxbliotheca, xix. 94-100, cf. ii. 
48-50, iii. 41^3) speaks of them as mostly nomadic 
Arabs, well-to-do through their conmiand of com- 
merce in myrrh and incense. It is significant that 
Diodorus, though he calls them Arabs, notes that 
they use Syriac (Aramaic) characters in writing, 
and this undoubtedly explains the classification 
made in the Assyrian inscriptions referred to above. 
By Strabo (" Gec^raphy," xvi. lS-26) Nabatea is 
described as a populous country not far from the 

Elamitic Gulf, rich in pasturage. There seems to 
be a probability, however, that Strabo did not dis- 
tinguish clearly between Nabateans and Idumeans. 
Plmy (" Natural History," v. 12, xii. 17) calls the 
Nabatseans Arabian neighbors of the Syrians, and 
connects them with Kedar (cf. Isa. Ix. 7). I Mace. 
V. 25 reports that Judas the Maccabee on a trans- 
Jordanic expedition when three days beyond the 
Jordan met the Nabatsans, who were friendly and 
gave information concerning the situation of the 
Jews who were in Gilead. According to I Mace. ix. 
35, Jonathan, when in flight from Bacchides, left his 
baggage with the Nabatseans so as not to be en- 
cumbered with it, and those Nabateeans were not 
far from Medeba (q.v.). Josephus (An/., XIII., i. 
2) retells the story of I Mace. ix. 35 in a slightly 
variant form, and (I., xii. 4) makes the name Na- 
batene cover the region between the Euphrates and 
the Red Sea (cf. Strabo, above). Further frequent 
references are made by Josephus to incidents in 
their history, as in An/., XIII., xiii. 5, XIV. v. 1, 
XX., iv. 1, etc. In Ant., I., xii. 4, Josephus evi- 
dently means to connect the Nabatsans with the 
Nebajoth of Genesis, and so to make the people 

There are two apparent difficulties in this identi- 
fication. The first is philological, Nebajoth being 
spelt with a tau (t), while in the inscriptions and on 
the coins the word is written with teth 
2. Racial (t). On this ground Glaser (see Bib- 
AfBnity. Hography) refuses the identification. 
While such a transmutation is rare, it 
is not without parallel, especially under the influ- 
ence of Hellenism. The second difficulty is the 
matter of race affiliation. By Nebajoth in Genesis 
Arabic connections are clearly implied, and with 
this agree Diodorus, Strabo, Pliny, and Josephus 
(inferentially). But the fact that in their writing 
the NabatsBans used Aramaic seems at first sight to 
justify those Assyrian inscriptions which speak of 
them as Arameans. The reconciliation is not diffi- 
cult, however, since Aramaic was the language of 
commerce and intercourse in quite early times (cf. 
II Kings, xviii. 26); the Nabataeans were carriers 
of commerce and therefore employed that language. 
It is corroborative of this conclusion that the names 
in the NabatsBan inscriptions are clearly Arabic, 
though the language is Aramaic. Still further, while 
the identification of this people with the Nebajoth 
of the Old Testament can not be a matter of demon- 
stration, there is justification for the identification. 
One ground is the well-known tenacity of existence 
of tribal names in the Arabic sphere. A second 




ground is that if, as some hold, the Nabatceans rep- 
resent one of the migrations from Arabia (q.v.)i the 
earlier mention in the Old Testament and the As- 
syrian monuments would be of the " advance guard " 
of the migration. The advance of the Edomites 
into Judea (cf. Mai. i. 1-5) in the early part of the 
sixth century is explained by the pressure upon 
them from the rear by the Nabatiean hosts, espe- 
cially as three centuries later the Nabatsans were 
in possession of the Edomitic region. 

n. History from 312 B.C.: What is practically 
consecutive history begins with the account by 
Diodorus Siculus (ut sup.) of the expedition sent 
against the Nabatseans in 312 b.c. by Antigonus 
under Athena^us after the former had driven Ptolemy 
Lagus from Coele-Syria. This force of 4,000 foot 
and 600 horse arrived at Petra, then 
I. TiU the and for centuries the chief city and 
Roman stronghold, while the males were away. 
Period, captured and looted it. But on the re- 
turn march due precautions were not 
taken and in a night attack the Nabatsans almost an- 
nihilated the force. A punitive expedition sent out 
under Demetrius invested Petra, but had to return 
content with pledges for good behavior on the part 
of the inhabitants. The account makes of them a 
pastoral people engaged also in commerce, and liv- 
ing under tribal or patriarchal government. From 
this time on information comes in general only 
through mention of the rulers of the people. The 
next notice in order of time is in I Mace. v. 8, at 
which time the ruler was a prince (Gk. tyrannos; 
not a king) known to history as Aretas I., with 
whom Jason the high priest took refuge. A little 
later than this (164-160 b.c; cf. I Mace. v. 25, ix. 
35) Nabatsans and leaders of the Maccabean party 
were friends. A notice by Agatharchides (a Greek 
historian who flourished c. 140 b.c.) reports that 
the Nabateeans held the Gulf of Akaba and the port 
of Elath (cf. C. MuUer, Geographia Grceci minoreSf i. 
178, Paris, 1855). The declension of the Ptolemaic 
and Seleucidan kingdoms c. 100 b.c. was this peo- 
ple's opportunity, which they improved under a 
King Aretas II. (possibly 110-96 b.c; this king is 
called Erotimus by Justin the historian, Liber his- 
toriarum Philippicarum, XXXIX., v. 5-6) by greatly 
extending the area which they controlled. Through 
this they came into conflict with the ambitious 
schemes for conquest of Alexander Janna>us, whom 
under a King Obedas they severely defeated (Jo- 
sephus. Ant., XIII., xiii. 5), and a little later de- 
feated and killed Antiochus XII. of Syria (Jo- 
sephus. War, I., iv. 7). Josephus (Ant., XIII., xv. 
2; War, I., iv. 8) reports that the Nabatseans took 
possession of Ccele-Syria under Aretas III. (85-60 
B.C.; probably the Aretas known as Philhellenoa, 
and on his coins as '* Harbath king of the Naba- 
tsBans **), and again defeated Alexander Janna?us, 
this time near Adida, and for a time at least con- 
trolled Damascus. They also later supported 
Hyrcanus in his conflict with Aristobulus (see Has- 
MONEANS, § 4; cf. Josephus, Ant., XIV., i. 4-ii. 3). 
This brought them into touch with the Romans, 
and Scaurus made an expedition against Petra, 
ravaged the country, but found the capital difli- 
cult of access, and was glad to compound for a 

sum of 300 talents (Joeephus, AtU,, XTV., v. 1 : 
War, I., viii. 1). 

In 55 B.C. Gabinius conducted a successful cam- 
paign against them (Josephus, Ant., XIV., vi. 4; 
War, I., viii. 7). Between 50 and 28 b.c a King 
Malchus (Malichos I.) is known, who in 47 b.c. fur- 
nished mounted soldiery for the Romans, and Ihis 
indicates the practical absorption of 
2. Under Nabatea into the Roman Empire, 
the During the Parthian invasion of Pales- 
Romans, tine (c. 40 b.c) Bialchus clearly favored 
the Parthians, declined to support 
Herod, and later was fined by the Romans for his 
course in the affair. In 32 b.c. Malchus furnished 
soldiery to Antony, but later, defaulting in pajrment 
of tribute, was defeated. Two important inscrip- 
tions relate to this king {CIS, i. 2, nos. 158, 174). 
Under Obodas II. (28-29 b.c.) the Nabataeans fur- 
nished soldiery to the Romans in the latter's cam- 
paign in South Arabia, 25-24 b.c He also left his 
mark on the coinage. Aretas IV. (9b.c.-40 a.d.) 
was confirmed in his kingdom by Augustus, though 
the latter had intended to add Uie Nabataean realm 
to Herod's dominions (Josephus, An/., XVI., x. 9). 
It was doubtless this king who assumed the title 
rcJiemrammah, " friend of (his) people," probably 
as an indication of his patriotic intentions and feel- 
ing. He furnished auxiliaiy troops to Varus for use 
against the Jews (Josephus, An/., XVII., x. 9; War, 
II., V. 1), and came into conflict with Herod Anti- 
pas, who had married his daughter and then put 
her away that he might marry Herodias (see Herod 
AND HiB Family, II., § 2). He escaped a Roman 
punitive expedition, the result of this quarrel, only 
by reason of the death of Tiberius. It was this Are- 
tas whose governor was in control of Damascus 
when Paul was there (II Cor. xL 32; cf. Acts ix. 
23-25; Josephus, An/., XX., iv. 1; also see Aretas, 
where the related questions are discussed); the fact 
shows a great though short-lived expansion of Nar 
batsean power, and is negatively corroborated by 
the non-existence of Damascene coins of the period 
from Roman mints. A very considerable mass of 
original material is known from this reign in the 
shape of numerous coins and twenty inscriptions. 
It is somewhat doubtful whether the Abias of Jo- 
sephus (Ant., XX., iv. 1) was a Nabata^an king; if 
he was, there was probably a change in dynasty. 
Malchus II. (48-71) furnished troops for the Ro- 
mans in the Jewish War, is known through a num- 
ber of inscriptions, and in his time Damascus was 
lost to the Nabatseans. Rabel (71-106) left a con- 
siderable number of coins and inscriptions covering 
a large area extending from between Damascus and 
Palmyra to a distance south of Petra. Apparently 
in the early years of his reign he was a minor under 
the regency of his mother Sekilath, sister of Mal- 
chus. He was the last independent ruler of his peo- 
ple, for in 106 a.d. Arabia Petrsea was made a Ro- 
man province by Cornelius Palma, governor of Syria, 
the province including the two most noted cities of 
the NabatsDans, Bostra in the north and Petra in 
the south. Of the Nabatsean people as a nation 
nothing more is heard, and they are merged in 
** the Arabians." 
The Nabateeans are of especial interest histor- 




ically from their relations to commerce, the mer- 
chandise from the East and Southeast having for at 
least four centuries and perhaps for a 
3. Signifir- longer period to pass through their ter- 
cance, ritoiy and to pay them tribute. They 
Language, have, moreover, left veiy interesting 
Religioa. cultural remains, especially at Petra 
(see Selah), at El-Hejr, and other 
places. They should be noted abo for their patriot- 
ism, which enabled them at times to defeat and at 
other times to compete on even terms with the 
Syrian and Roman powers. Their position on the 
border of the desert and partly in it is registered in 
the remains of their language, in which a number 
of Arabisms are taken up, these increasing in num- 
ber toward the south. In the inscriptions the let- 
ters are grouped in words, and the letters are often 
connected in a way which suggests the Arabic and 
Syriac as opposed to the ordinary individualism of 
Hebrew and Aramaic writing. Of their religion 
little is known; the chief deity seems to have been 
Dusara (Gk. Duaares), according to Arabic etymol- 
ogy meaning ** god of (the mountain district of) 
Sara," i.e., the mountain region between the Dead 
Sea and the Gulf of Akaba. He is sometimes iden- 
tified with Tanmiuz (q.v.), and appears to have 
been bom of the viigin goddess Allat. He was rep- 
resented under the form of an oblong stone twice as 
high as it was broad and erected upon a pedestal. 
He seems to have been worshiped under a number of 
names into most of which El, ** God,'' enters as an 
element. Allat, a goddess widely known in Arabia, 
was also worshiped, and her name enters frequently 
into the composition of proper names. Two deities 
known as Manutu and yaishah were adored at 
Hegra. The monuments indicate that some at least 
of the kings were deified, possibly not till after 
death. Geo. W. Gilmore. 

Bibuographt: E. M. Quatrim^re, Mdangis tfhittoire tt de 
pkHolooie orienteUe, pp. 5^159, Paris, n.d.; idem, in Nou- 
9muJaunuU aaiaHqve, xv (1835), 5-55. 97-137. 209-240; 
J. Q. Droyien, OfchiehU de9 HdUnismtu, ii. 2, pp. 55- 
50. 2d ed.. Hamburg. 1836-43; JBL, 1862, pp. 103-115; 
E. Kohn, Die ttddtiacKe und bUrgerliche Verfassuno dea 
romiMchen ReicKs, ii. 165-169. Leipaic, 1865; M. de VogO^, 
Swrie eeniraU, pp. 100-124. Paria. 1869; Schrader. KAT, 
pp. 147, 152-152 et paasim; idiem, Keiliruchrifttn und 
OeadUekUforaehuno, pp. 99-116. Gieasen. 1878; F. De- 
htmcK Wo Umo dtu Paradisa, pp. 296-301, Leipeic, 1881; 
C. Huber, Journal dun voyage en Arable, Paris, 1881; 
P. Beiier, L* Arabic avarU Mahomet d^ajnke lea inacrip- 
Hona^ Paris, 1885; G. Perrot. Hiat. de VaH dana VanHq- 
mU, iv. 344-^46. 389-394. Paris. 1887; F. Lenormant, 
Hiai. aneienna de F orient, vi. 466-470. Paris. 1888; F. 
Yicouroux, MOangea htbliguea, pp. 308-321, Paris. 1880; 
idem. Dictionnaire, farc. xxvii., 1444-1455; E. Glaser, 
Skiae der Oeaehichte und Oeographie Arabiena, vol. ii. 
passim, Berlin, 1890; P. Berger, Hiat. de VScriture, p. 
277, Paris, 1891 ; B. Miese, Geaehichte der griechiachen und 
makedaniacKen Staaten, L 300 sqq.. Gotha, 1893; C. Cler- 
mooi-Ganneau. RecueQ darchMogie orieniale, i. .39-74. 
'± 185-234. 368-377. iv. 191, Paris, 1896-1902; M. J. 
Lagrange, in Revue biblique, 1897, pp. 223-224; idem. 
ttudea aur lea religiana atmitiquea, pp. 70-83, 501-504. 
Paris, 1905; F. H. Vincent, in Revue biblique, 1898. pp. 
567-588; R. Dusaaud and F. Maclere. Voyage archio' 
logigueau Safa et dana le Djebel ed-DHU, Paris. 1901 ; idem, 
Miaaiona dana lea regiona diaerHqtiea de la Syrie moyenne, 
ib. 1903; H. Hilprecbt, Explorationa in Bible Landa, 
Philadelphia, 1903; R. E. BrOnnow and A. Domassewski, 
Die Provincia Arabia, Strasburg, 1904; R. Dusaaud, in 
JA, 1904. pp. 18^238; SchQier. OeaehichU, i. 726-744 
(oootains matter not in the Eng. transl., I., i. 345-362); 

JE, ix. 139; and tbe literature under Habmonsanb and 


On the coins consult: Revue nuimiamatique, 1858. pp. 
292-316. 362-385 (by Due de Luynea). 1868, pp. 153- 
168 (by M. de VogQ«); III., v (1887), 369-377 (by Soriin- 
Dorigny and Babelon); Levy, Numiamatiacke Zeitachrift, 
iii (1871), 445-448; De Saulcy, in Annuaire de la aocitU 
francaiae de numiamatique, iv. 1 (1873, 1-35; idem, in 
Milangea de numiamatique, iii (1882), 193-197. 

On tbe inacriptiona oonault: CIS, II., i (1893-1902), 
181-489; J. Euting, NabatAiache Inachriften aua Arabien, 
Beiiin, 1885; Duaaaud et Macler, in Voyage, ut aup., pp. 
168. 187; ZDMO, 1869, pp. 150-154. 652-654. 1884, 144, 
654; E. Renan in JA, VII., ii (1873), 366-382; idem, 
Documenta recueiUia dana le nord de FArabie, Paria, 1884; 
Hal^vy, in REJ, ix (1884), 8-16; P. Berger, in CompUa 
rendua de Vacadhnie dea inacripHona, IV., xii (1884), 377- 
393; C. Doughty, Documenta ipigraphiquea recueiUia dana 
le nord de F Arabic, Paria, 1884; A. Neubauer, in Studia 
Biblica, pp. 209-232, Oxford. 1885; JA, IX., xiii (1896). 
304-316, 485-497, x (1897). 197-207, 214-217, xi (1898). 
129-146 (by M. de VogQ^). x (1897), 518-535, xi (1898), 
523-533 (by C. (Hennont-Ganneau) ; Q. A. Cooke. Text- 
Book of North Semitic Inacriptiona, pp. 214-262, London, 

NABONXDUS, nab''6-nai' [or ni] dus. See Baby- 
lonia, VI., 1, and VI., 7, § 3. 

NADAB: Second king of Israel, son and succes- 
sor of Jeroboam I. His dates according to the old 
chronology are 954-952, according to Kamphausen 
and the modem school 915-914. The Biblical source 
is I Kings xiv. 20, xv. 25-30. He was evidently ag- 
gressive in character and aimed to carry out the 
policy of his father in the relations with Judah, for 
his death occurred while he was besieging Gibbethon, 
a town of the Philistines and therefore appertaining 
to Judah. He was assassinated by Baasha (q.v.), 
who exterminated the family of Jeroboam and 
seized the throne, thus establishing a new dynasty. 

NAHUM, nd'hum: One of the minor prophets. 
The name means "comforter." In i. 1 the prophet 
is called " the Elkoshite " which, according to Je- 
rome, ad loc., refers to a village in Galilee, probably 
represented by the modem al-Kauzah in Naphtali; 
while Epiphanius seeks the site near Bet-Jibrin in 
the vicinity of Eleutheropolis. Others, without suf- 
ficient reason, have seen Elkosh in Capernaum, ex- 
plained as *' village of Nahum "; and the modem 
Orientals regard the village of al-|^ush near Mosul 
as the birthplace of the prophet on the basis of a 
sixteenth-century tradition. The view of either 
Jerome or Epiphanius is preferable (cf. Nah. i. 9, 
12, 13, ii. 1). The supposition that Nahum wTote 
in Assyria is purely subjective, for his acquaintance 
with Assyrian matters is merely what any inhabitant 
of Palestine could have had from the Assyrian in- 
vasion. The Assyrian loan words mimar, *' prince," 
and pi/aaff " captain " (iii. 17), may, in like manner, 
be derived from the sojourn of the Assyrians in 
Palestine (cf. Jer. Ii. 27). It is generally held that 
the book, which was indeed " comforting " to Israel 
in its prophecy of divine vengeance on Assjrria, was 
written in the reign of Ilezekiah. Others make 
Nahum a contemporary of Manasseh, while Ewald 
dates him in the reign of Josiah, and Hitzig still 
later; Cocceius places him in the period of Jehoia- 
chim and Clemens of Alexandria in that of Zedekiah; 
while Bochart makes him later than Jeremiah and 
Ezekiel. It is thus evident that the text gives no 
certain evidence of its date of composition. Such 




passages as i. 11-12, ii. 3 show that Sennacherib's 
expedition against Jerusalem was a thing of the 
past, nor is there any reason to suppose that i. 14 
is a prophecy of the a&tfissination of this Assyrian 
monarch. The most important passage in this con- 
nection is iii. 8 sqq., which refers to the destruction 
of No Amon (Thebes) by Assurbanipal shortly after 
664 (see Assyria, VI., 3, § 14). It is accordingly 
probable that the prophecy of Nahum is to be dated 
about 660, in the reign of Manasseh. The book is 
an organic whole, its three chapters corresponding 
to its three chief themes. The first chapter con- 
tains the introduction and subject of the prophecy; 
the second a description of the judgment of Nineveh 
by an army sent by Yahweh; and the third the 
blood-guiltiness of Nineveh which brought destruc- 
tion on her. [The date of the book is more prob- 
ably not long after the death of the last great king 
of Assyria, Asshurbanipal, 626 B.C., when the de- 
cay of the empire began, j.f.m.] (W. VoLCKt-) 

Bibuoorapht: The best oommentary is in Q. A. Smith's 
Book of the Ttoelvet vol. ii., London, 1898. Among the 
many other oommentaries may be named: H. A. Grimm, 
DOsseldorf, 1790; £. J. Greve, Amsterdam, 1793; M. 
Neumann, Breslau, 1808; H. Ewald, PropheUtit ii. 349- 
360, Stuttgart. 1840; O. Strauss, Berlin, 1853; M. Brei- 
teneicher, Munich, 1861; L. Reinke, Monster, 1867; 
P. Kleinert, Bielefeld. 1868; C. F. Keil, Eng. transl., 
Edinburgh, 1868; J. A. Lindgien, Stockhohn, 1872; R. 
Gandell, in Bible Commentary^ vol. vi., London, 1876; 
F. Hitsig, 4th ed.. Leipeic, 1881; E. B. Pusey, in his Minor 
Prophets, new ed., vol. v., London, 1907; C. von Orelli, 
in his Minor Prophets, Ekiinburgh, 1893; A. B. David- 
son, Cambridge. 1896; W. Nowaclc, Die kleinen Propheten, 
pp. 226-246. Gdttingen, 1897; O. Happel, Wflrxburg. 
1902; C. Marti. Dodekapropheton, pp. 303-325, Tflbingen, 
1904. Consult further the works on O. T. introduction: 
H.Gunkel, in ZATW, xiii. (1893), 233-244; A. Billerbeck 
and A. Jeremias, in Beitrdge zur semitischen Sprachvoissen- 
schaft, iii. (1895). 1 sqq.; P. Haupt, in JBL, xxvi. 1 (1907); 
idem. The Book of Nahum: a new metrical Tran^ation, 
Baltimore, 1908; Vigouroux, Dictionnairet tsac. zxvii., 
cols. 1462-69. 

NAIRNE, n^m, ALEXANDER: Church of Eng- 
land; b. at Hunsdon, Hertfordshire, Jan. 17, 1863. 
He was educated at Jesus College, Cambridge (B.A., 
1884; M.A., 1887; fellow, 1887-92), and was ordered 
deacon in 1887 and ordained priest in 1888. He 
was curate of Great St. Mary's, Cambridge (1887- 
1889), vice-principal of the Cambridge Clergy Train- 
ing School (1887-91), assistant master of Harrow 
School (1891-92), and curate of Hadleigh (1892- 
1894). He has been rector of Tewin since 1894, 
examining chaplain to the bishop of St. Albans 
since 1899, and professor of Hebrew and Old-Testa- 
ment exegesis in King's College, London, since 1900. 
He collaborated with H. C. Besching in The Bible 
Doctrine of the Atonement (London, 1907); and con- 
tributed to The One Volume Commentary (1909). 


I. Primitive and Ethnic Names as Significant ($ 1). 

Names. Religious Influence upon 
Significance and Power of Names ({ 2). 

the Name (§1). Personality Expressed (5 3). 

Use in Taboo and Magic The Divine Name (5 4). 

(fi 2). The Name Jesus Christ 
II. Hebrew Names. (( 5). 

L Primitive and Ethnic Names: Among primi- 
tive peoples and in the ethnic religions the functions 
and ideas attached to the name are exceedingly 
important. It often represents and stands for the 

sum total and potency of the owner. " No being 

could exist without a name " (Wiedemann, Rdigion 

of the Ancient Egyptians, p. 294), Thus 

1. Signifi- " the name of a god was the god him- 
cance and self " (Budge, Egyptian Magic, p. 162); 
Power of hence utterance of it was among many 

the Name, peoples avoided, since merely pro- 
nouncing it might summon its posses- 
sor who would take summary vengeance on discov- 
ering that he had been lightly invoked. Hindus 
believe that when Kali calls a person by name, that 
person dies. To know the secret name of a deity 
or a devil was, in the eyes of the Egyptians, equiva- 
lent to such control over that being as to compel 
him to do man's will. In the Mandsean system it is 
taught that Hibil Ziwa descended to the lowest hell, 
wrested from its king the secret name of darkness, 
and so gained power over all hells (see MANDiEANs). 
The legend of Mar Ebedishu states that an evil 
female spirit soi^ht to seduce him from the path of 
rectitude, but that he bound her and compelled her 
to reveal her twelve names, by which her power for 
evil was nullified for those who*knew them (FoUc- 
lore, xi., 1900, pp. 151-152). Similarly, according to 
E^gyptian belief, the name of a human being was as 
much a part of him as his ka or his body. Indeed, a 
man's totality of being is in the books and in the 
inscriptions often siunmed up by the mention of 
these constituents. Man's perpetuity is dependent 
upon that of his name, and the blotting-out of the 
latter is equivalent to his destruction (cf. Ps. ax. 
13; and especially Rev. iii. 5). Creation, accord> 
ing to the same people, was accomplished by the 
creator's utterance of his own potent name. The 
power given by the name led to the conception 
of the secret name (cf. Rev. xix. 12). It was par- 
ticularly knowledge of this which gave power to 
him possessing the secret. Thus Isis gained control 
over the great god Ra by making a serpent bite 
him and inducing him in his agony to divulge his 
secret name (Budge, ut sup., p. 137). Yet when 
the name was engraved on a sacred object, as a 
scarab, the sanctity of the object protected it from 
misuse (Wiedemann, ut sup., p. 294). Out of the 
conception of the power of the name grew the bra- 
vado of the Egyptians in which they pretended to 
know the secret names of their deities and attempted 
to browbeat the gods into doing the will of man. 
The deceased, entering the hall of judgment, could 
pass the ordeal only by knowing the secret names 
of the judges, of the parts of the hall, even of his 
own members. Part of the catechism which was 
supposed to pass him through the trial consisted of 
these secret designations. 

In taboo and magic (see Comparattve Reuoion, 
VI., 1, b, c) the name comes much into considera^ 
tion. Since the name is a part of the person, it can 
be used as can the hair or clothing or any other of 
a man's belongings to work him ill. Here again 
enters a motive to keep the name secret. 

2. Use in Christian mothers of Abyssinia often 
Taboo and keep a child's baptismal name secret, 

Magic. the object being to protect the child 

from witchcraft, since a wizard or 

witch can not act against a person whose name is 

not known. With this idea a Malay of Borneo 




changes his name after a serious iUness so that the 
^irit which caused the attack may not find him to 
aflUct him a second time. Names are changed under 
other circumstances also, as at the crises of life, at 
puberty, at initiation into the secrets or tribal mys- 
teries. OccasionaUy the ultimate proof of friend- 
ship is exchange of names — each of the friends is 
thus thoroughly in the power of the other, or, ac- 
cording to another interpretation, each protects the 
other by assuming his name. Some Polynesian 
parents change their names at the birth of the first 
chfld, others at each addition to the family, ail of 
this to avoid recognition by the spirits and the use 
of the name to do harm to them or their progeny. 
Malays of some tribes will not utter their own names 
aloud, and the same is true of the Banks Islanders; 
yet to them a nameless person is imthinkable, a 
nonentity. Similarly Australian blacks believe that 
their lives may be taken by the use of their name, 
and with other peoples to write a name is to use 
sorcery. Among many tribes of India, of Mongolia, 
and of Africa, the wife never utters the husband's 
name, while the males of the Solomon and Pelew 
Islands will not pronounce the women's names, and 
the husbands in some Indian tribes of California 
never call their wives by name or divulge their own 
names. Australians never impart to others the 
name given an initiate in the tribal mysteries. In- 
deed, the taboos of the name are almost numberless. 
The case of the divine name Yahweh, which later 
Jews came to avoid in the reading of the Old Testa- 
ment (see Jehovah; Yahweh), is a case of reen- 
tranoe of the idea of taboo. Among some Australian 
tribes the name of Damaralun, a chief deity, is either 
utteriy avoided or spoken only in a whisper, is often 
a secret known only to initiates in the mysteries. 
On the other hand, many peoples regarded the name 
of a god, used as an element in a man's name, in 
the Ught of a blessing. So the Hebrews sometimes 
employed the name of God (see below), and other 
Semites did the same. In particular Phenician 
names were compounded with the names of deities 
— Abibaal, Baaleazer, Abdastart, Deleastart, Me- 
thusastart, Ithobaal (cf. Hebr. Ishbaai), Baalezor, 
Baalator, Merbaal are a few examples (Menander 
of Ephesus, in Josephus, Apion, i. 18, 21), with 
which may be compared Adoni-bezek (Judges i. 4- 
7), Adonizedek (Josh. x. 1 sqq.), compounded with 
Adon, cf. Adonait one of the titles by which God 
was addressed. With something of the same thought, 
still reminiscent of the fact that the name is also an 
expression of the power of the person, the divine 
name was variously used on seals, charms, and rings 
(see Abrasax, and cf. the medieval legend of Solo- 
mon's ring which bore the divine name Yahweh). 
The power of deity was thus magically employed 
and the results desired were confidently expected. 

Geo. W. Gilmore. 
IL Hebrew Names: The early Hebrews were not 
wont to name a child without considering the sig- 
nificance of the name; even when this was a family 
possession, its meaning did not escape the attention. 
But new names were oontinually formed to express 
special characteristics of the person, and the forma- 
tion of the language owes much to the creation of 
personal names. Indeed, in the giving of the name. 

one of the aims was to express some outstanding 
and particularly marked indi\'iduality. This prin- 
ciple was extended even to the naming 

1. Names as of places, the nomenclature often carry- 
Significant ing with it the reminiscence of some oc- 
currence (cf . Mizpeh, Ramah, Shechem, 

and note Gen. xxvi. 20, 33, and many passages). 
Many places bore a name derived either from the 
pre-Hebraic deity worshiped there or from some 
appearance of the God of Israel (Beth-shemesh, Beth 
Dagon, Bethel, Penucl). Personal names sometimes 
expressed the circumstances of the family when the 
child was born (Ex. xviii. 3 sqq.). Prophets gave 
to their children names which were living testi- 
monies to the content of their utterances (Isa. vii. 
3, viii. 3). But the general principle was to charac- 
terize the child's own individuality by the name 
bestowed. So in earliest times and among the neigh- 
bors of Israel the names of animals were given, as 
Jael, " mountain goat," Shaphan, " coney," Rachel, 
" ewe," Deborah, " bee," Huldah, " weasel." The 
explanation of such names on the basis of totemism 
(see Comparative Religion, VI., 1 b) is not satis- 
factory; it is better to think of them as indicating 
a detection of the characteristic quality of the ani- 
mal in the person — cf . the animal 83anbolism in the 
blessing of Jacob, Gen. xlix. Oreb (** raven ") and 
Zeeb (*' wolf ") resembled in characteristics the bird 
and beast of prey the names of which they bore. 
Names of the exilic period like Parosh, " flea," are 
easily understood if passages like I Sam. xxiv. 14- 
15 are recalled, while such a name as Tolah 
(** worm ") may have had its origin in actual events. 
The names of plants were given also, such as Tamar 
("date palm"), Eshcol ("cluster"), and Coz 
(" thorn "). Still other suggestive appellations are 
Barak (" lightning "), David (" dariing "). 

But among the Hebrews religious affairs and cir- 
cumstances influenced much the formation of names, 
though the creation of names having as an element 
a divine name is by no means confined to them, such 
formations being common among Arabs, and sim- 
ilar early Canaanitic and Hebrew names 

2. Religious are found, such as Abimelech, Abiezer. 
Influence Such formations may throw light upon 

upon religious conditions and conceptions. 
Names, as when the names given by Ahab to 
Ahaziah and Joram show that Ahab did 
not purpose to renounce Yahweh. In the numerous 
cases in which a definite attribute of deity or some 
close relationship is expressed in the name, the idea 
intended is that of invocation of a blessing, and it is 
generally found that the mother has the most in- 
fluence in the choice of the name (Gen. xxix.-xxx.). 
These theophoric personal names are of high value 
in the history of religion. They indicate what deity 
was esp)ecially honored at a given period, what di- 
vine names were in most common use, and not sel- 
dom they show what were the relations between a 
deity and his people. In the earliest period the 
divine name in most common use was the simple 
El — cf . Israel, Ishmael — and this is true as well of 
the Arabs as of the Hebrews. Frequently the idea 
expressed is that of relationship, as when words in- 
dicating fatherhood, brotherhood, and the like are 
employed — the Semitic ab, " father," ahi, " brother," 




ammi, " uncle," and the like. From the time of 
Moses with increasing frequency names were com- 
pounded with forms derived from the divine name 
Yahweh. The formation of new names continued 
until postexilic times — a proof that the significance 
of these names remained a living factor in their ap- 
plication, though it is a fact that family names 
were often chosen which carried >^*ith them historic 
reminiscences. Among the later Jews choice was 
often made of forms which had come down from 
earliest times, such as Jacob, Joseph, Mary, and the 
like; alongside these were others which came 
from Aramaic sources, such as Martha, Tabitha, 
Caiaphas, and also those which had Greek or 
Roman origin, such as Alexander, Andrew, Mark, 
and those which embodied the names of heathen 
deities, such as Bacchides. This last tendency 
is shown in another direction, namely, the Gre- 
cizing of Hebrew names, as Jason from Joshua, 
as well as in making translations of Hebrew 
names, such as Dositheus and Theodotus for 
Nathanael and Elnathan. Many Jews added to 
their Hebrew names others from a Greek or Ro- 
man source. 

Among the Hebrews then was especially true the 
maxim nomina aunt omtna, since to the Israelite the 

name was the expression of personal- 

3. Person- ity; were there disagreement between 

ality name and character, it was fitting to 

Expressed, change the former (Ruth i. 20-21). 

Indeed a change of name under new 
circumstances was no novelty (Gen. xli. 45; II Kings 
xxiii. 34). Sometimes teachers gave to their dis- 
ciples appellations which expressed the latters' spir- 
itual peculiarities (II Sam. xii. 25; Mark iii. 17). 
Inasmuch as between the person and the name a 
living connection existed, it was regarded as of 
great importance that the name be transmitted to 
posterity (Gen. xlviii. 16; Deut. xxv. 6-7). With 
a purpose similar to this, yet at the same time mark- 
ing distinctions, was the practise of adding the 
father's name to the child's, connecting the two 
with the words " son of." Later such names were 
formed simply from the father's, preceded by the 
word for son, e.g., Bartholomew, from Bar Talmay, 
Barabbas from Bar Abba. A related custom is that 
of Arabs, who sometimes take the name of the son 
with the prefix " father of." Going back to the 
fact that the name expressed the individuality is 
the frequent statement that God calls men by name 
(Ex. xxxi. 2, xxxiii. 12; Isa. xlv. 3-4); while some- 
times ** name " stands for ** person " (Rev. iii. 4, 
xi. 13 margin). 

From the foregoing it would be expected that the 
name of deity would be of especially high signifi- 
cance. This is brought out in the urgent request of 
Moses that he be told the name of God in order that 
\^*ith authority he might appear before the people 

with the message he was charged to 
4. The deliver. It is not to be inferred from 
Divine this that every new name meant a 
Name. new deity; but just as a new name 

for a man might imply new environ- 
ment or new relationships, a new phase of knowl- 
edge of deity may be marked by a new form of ad- 
dress. While it is true that the name of God was 

sacred, this sanctity did not take the form of taboo 
of pronunciation in the early Hebrew religion; such 
ideas came only in late Judaism. It is true that there 
were appearances of heavenly beings at times whose 
names it was forbidden to know, but this was that 
their essential nature should remain hidden (Gen. 
xxxii. 30; Judges xiii. 18). But the most holy 
name of the covenant God was in most constant 
use, not only in prayer but even in oaths. On the 
other hand, grave indeed was his sin who used the 
name lightly or in a false oath. And the divine 
name was employed not only in prayer but in giv- 
ing a blessing. When this name was spoken over 
a land, it indicated that the land had become lus, 
had come into close intimate relations with him 
(Deut. xxviii. 10; Amos ix. 12); it is equivalent 
to the human proclamation of a proprietor or re- 
gent. It follows that such a relation is not erf hu- 
man but of divine initiative, and this is especially 
true when the spot is a sanctuaiy (cf. Ex. xx. 24). 
So the ark bore Yahweh's name, and his name abode 
in the temple (II Sam. vi. 2; I Kings ix. 3); indeed 
the significance of a sanctuaiy was that it was built 
in his name, which name was a revelation of him- 
self. Hence the altars built to mark some special 
manifestation of deity bore an appellation which 
carried with it the memory of the fact. It was be- 
cause of the special presence of Yahweh's name at 
Jerusalem that at the temple was concentrated wor- 
ship of him, and Levi became the holy tribe for a 
like reason. The name of God is not a thing arbi- 
trarily thought out, it is of the essence of deity, a 
revelation of himself and so self-expressive; it im- 
parts knowledge of him and guides in the way of 
his service (Mic. iv. 5). Abuse of it or of his rights 
or disregard of the holiness of his belongings is a sin 
against the name which partakes of his own attri- 
butes as being " glorious and fearful " (Deut. xxviii. 
58). Israel's greatest guilt was that it foigot his 
name. Regard for his name was one of the motives 
God had in protecting his people (Ezek. xx. 9, 14). 
His name is said to dwell in ^e angel of the pres- 
ence sent to guide Israel, who became therefore a 
manifestation of the divine self. Hence the face of 
God and his name are applied to manifestations of 
his presence even in heathen religions, as when in 
a Sidonian temple Astarte is called ** the name of 
Baal," by which was meant that the goddess 
was a manifestation of the Baal himself, and simi- 
larly in Carthage Taanit was called the '' face of 

The New Testament shows the same emphasis 
upon and usage of the word name. The name Jesus 
Christ embodies the whole content of his person 

and sums up the knowledge of him and 

5. The Name his work. The apostles spread this 

of Jesus name throughout the earth; believers 

Christ rely upon it (John i. 12) and in it are 

blessed (Acts iv. 12); by it miracles 
were wrought (Acts xvi. 18), though not as by a 
formula of magic (cf. John xiv. 13); but in order to 
accomplish this an inner connection with him is 
needful (Acts xix. 13). Baptism is in his name or 
in the triune name (Matt, xxviii. 19; Acts ii. 38) 
— a usage, however, which goes back to Jewish 
custom of baptizing '* in the name." AU of these 




customs beqieak an inner community with Christ 

of which baptism is but the external expression. 

(C. YON Obelu.) 

BnucxauLPHT: For tlie use of the name among piimitiTe 
peoples eonsult: J. G. Fraier, Qddtn Bough, vol. i., Lon- 
dotu 1900; R. H. Oodrington, Mdanetian Studif^ pp. 
43 s(iq., ib. 1801; F. F. von Andrian, C/^er Wortaber- 
qiatJbtn^ Munich. 1896; A. Wiedemann. Rdigion of the 
AneietU BffVpHane, pp. 155-158, 241. 294-205. New York. 
1897; E. A. W. Budge. EffifPtian Maoic, pp. 157 eqq.. 
London. 1800; J. Batchelor. The Ainu, pp. 142. ib. 1001; 
W. H. Fumeee, Borneo Headhunten, pp. 16-17, ib. 1002; 

E. Crawley. Myatie Roee, pasBim. ib. 1002 (very full); 
idem. Tree of Life, pp. 56-57. 75. 162. 177. 213. 221. ib. 
1905; and the journal Folk-Lore is partieulariy rich in 

For the Biblical tmeta two exceDent and. in the hitter 
caee, elaborate artidee are tobe noted in DB, iii. 478-485. 
and BB, iii. 3201-3331. Consult further: L. L5w, Bei- 
Moe nr judieehen AUerthumekunde, iii. 02-110, Leipuc. 
1871 ; £. Nestle, Die ieraditiechen Bigennamen naeh ihrer 
retigionageaehichaichen Bedeutvng, Haarlem. 1876; £. 
Renan. in REJ, 1882. pp. 161-177; J. Jacobs. Studiee in 
BAHeal Arehadlogy, London, 1804; M. Jastrow. in JBL, 
1804, pp. 10 sqq., 101-127; M. Qrundwald, Die Bigen- 
namen dee A. T^inihrer Bedeuhing fUr die Kenntnia deaho- 
bt&iaehen VolkaglatAena, BresUu, 1805; G. B. Gray. Studiea 
in HArew Proper Namea, London. 1806; idem, in Bxpoai- 
tor, 1807, pp. 173-100; idem, in Expoaitory Timea, Sept.. 
1807. pp. 555^558. 1800. pp. 232-234; G. Keiber. Die 
reiigionageaehiehtiiche Bedeutung der hdfriiiachen Bigen- 
namen, TQbingen. 1807; J. B6hmer. Daa bibliaehe " Im 
Nam^n,** Gieoeen. 1808; A. Deiaamann. Bibdatudien, pp. 
181-186, Marburg. 1805, Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1001; 

F. Giesebrecht, Die alttealamentliehe SchOtxung dea Oottea- 
namea, Ktaisiberg, 1801; F. Ulmer. Die aemitiachen 
Bige nna men im A. T., Leipaic. 1001; R. P. Lagrange, 
Audea aur lea rdigiona ahnitiguea, paoaim. Paria. 1005; 
A. R. Haberabon, The New Teatament Namea and Tiilea 
of the Lord of Olory, Lcmdon, 1010; F. C. Conybeare, in 
JQR, viiL 576-608. ix. 50-114. 447-470. 481-603; Vigour- 
ouz, DieHonnaire, fase. xxviii. 1660-77; and works on 
O. T. theology, e4(., Sehiilts, chap, xzvili. 

HAMDIG: A means of discipline formerly in use 
in the German Lutheran churches. It took place 
publicly before the congregation, at the close of the 
sermon, and consisted in a personal address to the 
offending member. Several Lutheran directories 
contain a provision for its application, as a stage of 
discipline intermediate between the ordinary pri- 
vate pastoral admonition and entire excommimi- 
cation. It was ordered to be applied only in case 
of open and notorious sin, and after the fact of 
notoriety had been established in the consistory. 
Apart from this process, the preacher was directed 
to abstain from any naming or identification of in- 
dividual sinners. With the rest of the providons 
for public penance it gradually disappeared, and 
is now nowhere used. See Chubch Discipline, 

m., f 1. (O. MBJERf.) 


Documentaxy Basis (f 1). 
Nana of Erech (f 2). 
Elam, Armenia, and India (f 3). 
Syna^ Phrygia, and Greece (f 4). 

Nancea is the name of a goddess mentioned in 
IT Mace. i. 13, 15. The mention occurs in what 
purports to be a letter dated 125-124 b.c. from 
Jews of Palestine to Jews in Egypt commending to 
the latter the feast of dedication of the Temple. 
According to the context Antiochus (by whom Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes is almost certainly meant) when 
in Persia entered the temple of Nanaea ^ith the 
puipoee of marrying the goddess and taking a great 

part of the treasures of the temple as dowiy, this be- 
ing a device sometimes employed by conquerors, 
thus to obtain control of the wealth 

X. Docu- in the temples and yet avoid the chaige 

mentary of sacrilege. The priests of the temple, 
Basis. however, trapped him and his company 
in the temple, stoned them and cut 
them to pieces. The parallel passage, I Mace. vi. 
1-4, does not name the goddess, but locates the 
temple in a city in Elymais in Persia (Elymais was 
a province in Susiana, north of the Zagros, there- 
fore " in Persia "); ^ot does it place his death there 
but simply records his repulse. II Mace. ix. re- 
cords that Antiochus essayed to rob a temple in 
Persepolis (whose is not reported), and was beaten 
back and died after his return from Persia. Accord- 
ing to Appian {Historia, xi. 66) there was a temple 
of Aphrodite in Elymais, while Polybius (Historia, 
xxxi. 11) tells of a temple of Artemis in the same 
region. Greek and Roman writers were in the habit 
of identifying foreign deities with their own, and 
not in all cases is it possible to make out the exact 
god to which reference is made by them. In the 
present case the reference to Aphrodite and Artemis 
may shed light. On the other hand, II Mace. i. and 
ix. are irreconcilable, since Persepolis was not in 

The identification of the deity mentioned in 
I Mace. i. 13, 15, leads back with considerable as- 
surance to the very early Sumerian war goddess 
Nana, patroness of Erech, enshrined in the temple 
E-ana (see Babylonia, IV., § 5, VII., 2, § 7; and 
cf. Schrader, KAT, p. 422), named in the Baby- 
lonian litanies and elsewhere in the inscriptions. 
Her image was carried away to Elam 

2. Nana c. 2280 b.c. by Kudur-nan-|^undi, 
of Erech. where it remain^ till Asshurbanipal 
recovered it about sixteen hundred 
years later (see Babylonia, VI., 1, § 1); meanwhile 
the deity's place in the city seems to have been as- 
sumed by Ishtar in her own temple in Erech known 
as E-ulmash. Coalescing at times with Ishtar (an 
illustration of the confusion that resulted from 
this is furnished by the fact that Ashtar in Manda?an 
and Nani in modem Syriac denote the planet Venus), 
at other times recognized as an independent deity, 
she remained in one form or the other one of the 
great deities of Babylonia, and Tiglath-Pileser III. 
sacrificed to her as " Lady of Babylonia," and at 
one time she appears in connection with Nebo. 
She seems to have been adopted in various regions, 
and her history is instructive as an iUustration of 
the very common process in the history of religion 
of coalescence of tiie form of one deity with those 
of others (see Comparative Religion, VI., 2, d). 
In that way she seems to have borne many names 
and to have been known as Nani, Nanai, Nanaya, 
Ansea, Anitis, Anaitis, Tanata, Tanath, Tanais, and 

The existence of the cult of Nana-Nansa in Elam 
is not proved. Apart from the passages cited above 
(§ 1), the evidence is somewhat elusive, the most 
weighty being the inference that her cult is likely 
to have developed there owing to the long residence 
of her image in the region. Moreover, that the deity 
referred to by Appian and Polybius as Aphrodite 




or Artemis was NaoBBa is made exceedingly prob- 
able by the fact that Nansa's attributes and cults 
were appropriated by, assimilated to, 
3. Elam, or identified with those of Aphrodite in 
Armenia, Asia Minor and Greece, as also in part 
and India, by those of Artemis. This evi- 
dence is not made more weighty by 
the testimony of the Pseudo-Melito, sometimes 
cited, who reports that Nanai was worshiped in 
Elam, her worship having been instituted by her 
royal father after she had been captured by the 
enemy (in Corpus apologetarunif ed. J. C. T. de 
Otto, ix. 426, 476-^77, 505, Jena, 1872). Pseudo- 
Melito is simply a composite dependent upon the 
sources already noted. For Armenia it is reported 
by Agathangelos (supposed to have been a secre- 
tary of Tiridates II. of Armenia in the fourth Chris- 
tian century, to whom is attributed a life of Greg- 
ory the Illuminator) in the Armenian text that his 
people destroyed a temple of ** Nanea, daughter of 
Ormuzd " in Thil (ed. of Venice, 1835, pp. 108, 
587); the Greek text declares that they destroyed 
the " altar of Athena, daughter of Zeus " (it is to 
be noted that Athena's attributes repeat some of 
Nana's). This follows a statement to the effect 
that the golden image of Anahita had been des- 
troyed. The importance of these two statements 
does not rest alone in the mention of Nanea, but 
in the fact that the two deities are discriminated. 
This discrimination does not always occur, since it 
is quite clear that Anahita and Namea were amal- 
gamated or identified in many places, just as were 
Nana and Ishtar in Assyria-Babylonia. Mihr and 
Nanea occur in Armenia as names of the deities of 
sun and moon. In Afghanistan many places still 
bear the name Bibi Nani, ** the Lady Nana " 
(Venus). Indo-Scythian coins of the first and sec- 
ond centuries a.d. bear the name of Nana with the 
epithet queen, also the forms Nana>a and Nanaia, 
the figiu^ of the goddess sometimes having a cres- 
cent on the head, which shows that the deity bore 
there the same general characteristics she had 
further west in her relations with Ishtar and Aphro- 
dite (cf . P. Gardiner, Coins 0/ the Greek and Softhic 
Kings of Bactria and India, London, 1884). Apart 
from these cases, India does not know a deity Nana 
or Nana?a, which speaks strongly for the importa- 
tion from the west. The connection was probably 
established through the Syrian Nanai, but may 
have come by way of Elam and Armenia. The fact 
that Nana'a in Indo-Scythic environment repre- 
sents the moon, while the earlier affiliations of Nana 
of Erech and Syria were with Venus is offset by the 
later affiliations which in the West connect Ishtar 
with the moon. Parallel influences are at work. A 
possible way of transit for the goddess was through 
the Parthians and Scythians from the second cen- 
tury B.C. to the first Christian century. There is no 
diflficulty in accounting for the spread of the cult 

Isho bar-Bahlul, one of the most important of 
Syrian lexicographers, living in the tenth century, 
gives Nanai as the name of the planet Venus (which 
again agrees with the coalescence of Nana in Aphro- 
dite in the West). Isho reports that the inhabi- 
tants of the region between Nisibis and the Tigris 

worshiped this deity (P. de Lagarde, GesammeUe 
Abhandlungen, p. 16, Leipsic, 1866). Granius 
Licinianus (Annates, p. 9, Leipsic, 1858) 
4. Syria, asserts that Antiochus Epiphanes went 
Phrygia, to Hierapolis (in Syria) to many Diana 
and Greece. (—Artemis) and received the temple 
treasure as dowry, just as I Maoc. 
states that he intended to marry Nanspa. While it 
is known that Nansea was worshiped in Syria, the 
possibility is not excluded that by Diana Licinianus 
means Anahita. The known deity of Hierapolis, 
however, was Atargatis (q.v.), whom Lucian de- 
scribes {De dea Syria, xxxii.). Reports of the origin 
of Attis in Phrygia ascribes his birth to Nana, a 
virgin, who was impr^nated by putting a pome- 
granate (or almond) in her bosom (Pausanius, VIL, 
xvii. 11; Amobius, Adv. nationes, v. 6, in ANF, vi 
491). A connection here with Ic^tar and the East 
is foimd in the fact that the pomegranate was 
sacred to Ishtar, and was, from the complexity of 
its fruit, a symbol of fertility. It was in Phiygia, 
probably, that the transition was made by which 
Artemis and Nana, as also Aphrodite and Nana, 
were conjoined, a proof of the former conjunction 
being found in an inscription from the Pineus, prob- 
ably dating from the third century B.C., on a tablet 
which " Axios and Cleo " devoted to " Artemis 
Nana " (Corpus inscriptionum Atticarum, iii. 131). 
While the cult of Nana was at times distinguished 
(as by Amobius, ut sup.) from that of Cybele, there 
was confusion between these two cults also, and it 
is noteworthy that a cult of " the mother of the 
gods " (Cybele) existed at the Pirajus. The asso- 
ciation of Artemis wnth the moon is another con- 
necting link which aids in the assurance that Nana 
traveled as far west as the Piraeus, the Syrian Nana 
being also connected with the moon. Jerome and 
Pliny call the goddess of Elam Diana. 

Thus the worship of the Sumerian goddess Nana 
of Erech is traced with probability in Elam, with 
certainty in Syria, Bactrian-India, Asia Minor^ and 
Greece. She had afiiliations with Ishtar in Assyria- 
Babylonia, with Anahita in Persia, Armenia, and 
possibly in Bactria, with Ashtoreth (Astarte) in 
Phenicia, and went to the making of Artemis or 
Diana, of Aphrodite or Venus, and of Athena in the 
Greek world. Geo. W. Gilmore. 

Bibliographt: Journal of the Aeiatic Society of Benoai^ 
m (1834), 172 (by C. Masaon). 449-451 (by J. Prinsep). 
V (1836). 266-268 (by J. Avdall; all on Indo-Scythic 
coins bearing the name of Nanea) ; H. H. Wilson. Ariana 
arUiqua, pp. 362-363. London, 1841 (also on the coins); 
Bernstein, in ZDMO, x (1856), 549; Windischmann. in 
AM At via (1858), 87sqq.; J.'B.l&mim, inRevtte delorieiU 
de VAlgirie, 1864, pp. 198 nqq.; Rawlinson's Herodotus, 
i. 624 sqq.. 658 sqq., New York. 1875; F. Lenonnant, in 
Gazette arch^logique, ii (1876). 10-18. 58-68; P. Schols. 
Ootzendierut und Zauberipeaen, pp. 355-364. Regensbuix. 
1877; E. Schrader, KeUinechriften und OeachichUfor- 
schunot PP' 107-109. Giessen, 1878; idem, KAT, passim; 
A. Stein, in Indian Antiquary^ xvii (1888). 89 sqq.; J. 
Darmesteter. Le Zend-Avesta^ ii. 363-366. Paris. 1892; 
L. R. Famell, Cutis of the Greek States, ii. 484 sqq.. 590, 
627 sqq., Oxford, 1896; H. Gelzer. in the Berichte of the 
Royal Saxon Academy of Sciences, xlviii (1896), 99 sqq.; 
R. P. Lagrange, Etudes sur les rdigiona eSmitiqueSt pp. 
138. 454. Paris, 1905; J. G. Fraxer, Adonis, Attis, Osirie, 
pp. 163-164, 178-179, London. 1906; Vigouroux, Die- 
tionnaire, fasc. xxviii. 1473-74; W. von Baudissin. in 
Hauck-Herzog, RE, xiii. 631-645; and the commentaries 
on II Maccabees. 




HANAK, na'nilk, SHAH : Indian religious founder. 
See l2n>iA, I., 3, f 3; Sixbs, Sikhism. 

NARTES, nants or nllnt, EDICT OF: One to reg- 
ulate the relations between the Reformed Church in 
France and the State, issued by Henry IV. in 1598 
and revoked by Louis XIV. in 1685. The Reformed 
Church of France, formed in 1559, found it difficult 
to tnitint^in its rights agauist the Roman Catholic 
majority. At last, in 1589, when Henry of Navarre 
becaune king of France, all difficulties seemed to 
have been overcome. In 1593, however, Henry 
adopted the Roman Catholic faith, and the exist- 
ence o[ the Protestant Church seemed to be again 
in danger. But Henry's apostasy from the Re- 
formed faith was prompted exclusively by political 
motives, and the fears of the Huguenots were with- 
out basis in fact; the king was still inclined to se- 
cure for the Reformed Church a stable existence 
in his country. The deputies of the Reformed 
churches met in Sept., 1593, at Nantes and in the 
next year at Montauban to guard their interests. 
There also met at Sainte-Foy in 1594 a political 
convKition of members from all provinces, where 
the Reformed effected an oiganization to defend 
their rights. A general council was constituted 
upon which was conferred all authority in religious 
matters, and imder its jurisdiction all provinces 
were to be placed. It consisted of ten members, 
one for each province, four from the nobility, four 
from the third estate, and two from the clergy. 
Provincial councilors were also chosen, consisting 
of five to seven members, of whom at least one was 
to be a clergyman. This organization rendered 
great service and showed the power of the Hugue- 
nots against their enemies. The next convention 
took place in 1595 at Saumur. It requested in vain 
freedom of religious worship in the kingdom. The 
following year, at the convention of Loudun, the 
Protestant cause met with greater success. Du 
Plessis-Momay (q.v.) rendered great services by 
his negotiations between the king and the Protes- 
tants. The meeting aimed at nothing more than 
freedom of conscience; it did not represent a party, 
but a church. Toward the end of 1597 both parties 
agreed upon the principal articles, and on Apr. 13, 
1508, the king si^ied the E^dict of Nantes. On Apr. 
30 and then on May 2 he signed secret supplemen- 
taiy articles. 

The rights granted to the Reformed by this edict 
did not differ materially from those of former edicts; 
the position (rf the Protestants was still very differ- 
ent from that of the Roman Catholics. The edict 
did not permit freedom of worship; the Reformed 
were satisfied with " a certain freedom of religion 
and some justice in the courts." The freedom of 
conscience granted was not of great import while 
the civil and political rights were not the same for 
all and while there existed no freedom of worship. 
The Roman Catholic service was reinstituted in the 
whole kingdom; churches and ecclesiastical posses- 
sions were returned to the clergy; the Reformed 
were obliged to pay tithes to the priests, to observe 
the feasts and fasts of the Roman Catholic Church 
and conform to its marriage laws; they were allowed 
to celebrate divine service only in certain places 


under restrictions. But they gained admission to 
the universities, schools, and hospitals; and the 
king made all offices of the State accessible to them. 
Mixed courts were established for cases in which 
the litigants were of different denominations. The 
edict nullified the authority of the provincial and 
general councilors instituted by the convention of 
Sainte-Foy. It forbade political meetings without 
the consent of the king and to take up arms. The 
children of refugees were acknowledged as French- 
men. All families were reinstituted in their rights, 
honors, and possessions. The Reformed had the 
right to hold consistories, colloquies, provincial and 
general synods, to open schools in the towns where 
freedom of worship was granted to them, and to 
impose taxes for the support of their clergy, the ex- 
penses of their synods, and the like. 

The ratification of the edict by the parliaments 
presented many difficulties. The clergy objected 
to each one of the articles. The parliaments op- 
posed especially the establishment of the mixed 
courts and the admission to public offices, and they 
succeeded in making a number of important modi- 
fications. The ratification took place only under 
compulsion by the king. The execution of the edict 
was even more difficult than its ratification. The 
Reformed were not satisfied with it in its modified 
form. They appealed to former promises and con- 
cessions of the king, but he paid little heed to the 
complaints although he made some secret promises 
in regard to a few articles. In the mean time, the 
edict had been introduced in some territories by 
commissaries appointed by the king. The deputies 
of the Reformed were assembled to watch and 
hasten the execution of the edict. In order to 
avoid trouble, the king ordered them to disperse 
and to call no new conventions. The Reformed 
resisted as long as possible and succeeded in ob- 
taining permission to reassemble in Sainte-Foy in 
Oct., 1601, to appoint general deputies who were 
to reside at the royal court and to hear the griev- 
ances of the provinces and present them before the 
king. (C. ScHMiDTf.) 

The Huguenots were not satisfied with the Edict 
of Nantes because it gave them much less than 
they thought they were entitled to; while the Ro- 
man Catholics were furious because it gave the 
Huguenots so much. But the Edict is a mile-stone 
in the pathway to the ideal — a free Church in a 
free State. The Huguenots got much more than 
the most liberal Roman Catholic sovereign could 
or would have given them, and Henry evinced a 
courage and broad-mindedness which place him 
among the great rulers of history. For many years 
the Huguenots had little to complain of respecting 
the way the Edict was enforced. It threw around 
them many safeguards and they prospered so greatly, 
especially in the quiet years between 1629 and 1665, 
that to be as rich as a Huguenot became a proverb 
in France. But such religious liberty and material 
prosperity were hard for the Roman Catholic clergy 
to endure and they complained to the king, Louis 
XIV., who in 1665 assumed an unfriendly attitude 
toward the Huguenots. He issued then the first 
of nearly two hundred orders and laws which took 
away every vestige of protection afforded by the 


Edict to the Hugueaota. For twenty ycara he con- 
tinued this (^oduaily encroaching legislation. To 
mention a tew of theae ordera; on June 20, 1665, he 
prescribed penalties to those who once having been 
" converted " to Roman Catholicism should relapse; 
on Oct. 24, l6()o, he declared that little children who 
■were claimed by the priests to have been " convert- 
ed," that, is, had used words which vere interpreted 
as implying a preference for the Roman Catholic 
faith, although owing to the tender years of these 
children it was doubtful if they knew what they were 
saying, that such children were to be forcibly taken 
from their parents and brought up in the alleged pre- 
ferred faith; in Aug., 16C'J, he forbade the Hugue- 
nots to leave Friuice; on July 31, 1679, he forbade 
the Huguenots to hold any service while the place 
was being visited by the archbishop or bishop; on 
Oct. 10, 1670, he forbade the Huguenots to hold 
synods without his permission, and without the pres- 
ence of a royal commiiMioner; oti Feb. 30, lOSO, he 
forbade Huguenot women to act as midwives; on 
June, 16S0, he forbade marriages between Roman 
Catholics and Huguenots. So it went. The Hugue- 
nots saw the walls slowly closing in on them and 
knew that it was only a question of time when they 
would be cnished. Meanwhile every inducement 
was held out to (hem to abandon their faith. On do- 
ing BO their temporal fortunes immediately changed 
and employment of a lucrative character came to 
them, from which their faith had excluded them. 
One of the active agencies in effecting the " conver- 
sion " of those who were indifferent to worldly ad- 
vantages was the dragonnades, those incursions of 
brutal soldiery, allowed by their officers to practise 
every outrage and insult and every cruelty, short of 
taking life, upon those on whom they were billetted 
until the unhappy victims were almost, and some- 
times quite, willing to yield up their faith and so 
escape their tormentors. [It was from the ranks of 
the forcibly converted and their descendants that 
the rationalistic movement (represented by Voltaire, 
Rousseau, Diderot, and others) proceeded, which 
had much to do with precipitating the French Revo- 
lution (ri.v.). A. H. fj.] 

Ry this combination of persecution and depriva- 
tion many of the Huguenots were driven out of 
France and many others into the Roman Catholic 
Church. The king supposed that the Huguenot 
church had been destroyed, and as the Edict of 
Nantes bad become a mockery he revoked it on 
Oct. 17, 1685. Then followed a great exodus of 
Huguenots. With broken hearts, at the risk of 
their lives, for the exodus was forbidden, with the 
loss of their property, they turned their backs 
upon the land they loved bo well, and in strange 
lands with dignity, patience, and success began life 
afresh. They greatly enriched the lands to which 
they came, for they brought ivith them the manu- 
factures and the culture in which France was then 

But whiit of those who did not leave ? Deprived 
of all legal stan<ling, proscrilied by the ■'itate, spokrzi 
of as dangerous to the bmiy politic, with a senU^ncu 
of denth hanging over them if they dared to meet 
for religious worship (and many a minister was put 
to death and many a layman died in the galleys 

for this monstrous "crime"), theeemen and women, 
and even the children, showed the finest qualities 
of character. In spite of persecution they preserved 
their faith, both in its private &nd public exercises, 
ami fio when after a century a better day dawned 
for tliem their numbers showed that PrDtestantisni 
had never ceased to be a faith in France. The pagM 
of Huguenot history during this period are lighted 
by many a persecutor's fire, and across them movt 
&B heroic figures as history can show. 

BiBuoflHU-aT: Ttw te« of tbo edict sad o( that of letir 
ciitioD an in Reicti. OixufficiXt. pp. 349-353. 3Sl-3Mi 
Bad in Atniesse, below ; traoslations of tlie odict imd leni- 
cntJoD Bad □( nlaled dacumepta an in the important To- 
nMnurv Cdtbratian o/ Ihr Proniuloalian of lAt Editt 4 
Nanlrt . . . bu the Hugumol Sodeiy of Amtrica, Nev 
York, 1900, and in J. FooUine, Utimrirm of a HuetuaM 
Family, Sew York. 1907. Baudes tlie literatun rtm 
under Dn Pi.uau-MnRH:kT; Hcudgnois; and Fkant*, 
comult: E. Benolt, Hial. dt I'MU dt SanUt. G y<^.. fMIl. 
ieS3-95: Mtnaiia tl comtportdana dt Dvptatit-Mar- 
nan. voli. vl. aqq., PBrig. 1821; E. Bonnauem. Lf Di«- 
Bomadrt. Hitt. da Camitardt »u Laitii XIV., Paiilt 
18J42; 6diU, diclaraliont tl arrtttt conccmaru la nfwiiriB 
. . . rtfarmtt. leat-ITSI, ib. 18S5: F. Punux and A. 
^butier, Sludet ivr la rinocalioH, ib. ISSS; T. 9cbott. 
Dit AafhtbuBO dtt EdikU con Nanla. Bolle. 1886: L. 
AsueBse, f/i^. de ritabii4ttmeni du pnjttflantiamt ^ 
Franct, iv. fi£7 sqq.. PariB. 1836; O. Doaea, La Rftat*- 
Hon d, rtda dt Na-n/a. 3 vols., ib. IBM: J. Faurey. Htnit 
IV. rt ridit dt Nanlrt. Bordeaux. 1003; F. Bert, Bin. dt 
la rivocaHon dt Vtdit de Nanlf i Bordiaax, Pan*. 1908; 
Abb« RouquDtic, £ludu wr la rtmraliim de Ildit it 
NaiUit, m Lanfurdnt: la faoiHf' {168S-J7If). ib. 1908: 
Rol)iii«)a, European HUtory, ii, 183 aqq., 2S7 vtn.. 314 

HARD (SPIKERARD): A plant {V<denana 
jatamanai or Nardoatachyi jatamanri) growing on 
heights and in plains of nortiiem and eastern India, 
and in southern Arabia and Gedrosia, from which 
a favorite and costly perfume was obtained (ef. 
Cant. i. 12, iv. 13-14; Mark xiv. 3-^5). It was 
brought into the trade of the West, including Pales' 
tine, by the Phenicians. The common nnrd unguent 
consisted of a mixture of oils of several aromatic 
plants belonging to the genus Vaieriana, and w«* 
usually placed in small alabaster boxes (cf. Mark 
xiv. 'i) or in scent bottles. Nard was used not only 
as an unguent but also to flavor wine, and the oil 
was even drunk. With such costly nard Uaiy an- 
ointed Christ at Bethany uj( days before the Pass- 
over (John xii. 1 sqii.), typifying his approaching 
burial, since this oil was also used ia presen'e the 
corpse from decay (Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, 
v.). (R. KriTEi.) 

Bibuohrapht: ThmphrutiB. HM. planttorum. IX,. vii. 
•i-. Pliny. Nal. hiti.. nil. 28-27. liii. 2; O. Celnui. Him»- 
botantrum. ij. 1-11. AndtArdam, 174fi; AtuUii Rpttaretitt, 
ii, 405-417. Calcutta. IS7S; W. Dymocli. FharmJicograjAia 
Indica. ii. 233-338. Iflndon. 1S91: DR, iv. Oil; EB. iv, 
4749-5); CCS. ii. 227, 871: Jii,lx.nO; Vigounniz, 1>k- 
liannain. laac. xzviii. 1478-80. 

HASH, HEIfRY SYLVESTER: Protestant Epis- 
copalian; b. at Newark. O., Dec. 22, I8S4, He waa 
edufated at Harvard (A.B., 1878) and at the Epis- 
copal Tlieological School, Cambridge, Mass., from 
which he wiis graduated in 1S81. In 1SS2 he was 
appointed to his present position of professor of 
the literature and interpretation of the New Testa- 
ment in the latter institution. He was also rector 
of the Church of the Redeemer, Chestnut Hill, Mass., 


(tod 1SS8 to 1903. He has written: The Genesia of 
at Sadal Corucienee (New York, 1897); Elhict and 
JEmdotwn (1899); Hittory of Dm Higher Criiidtm 
tf Ike Nao TettamtaU (1900); and AUming Life 

BASmXH, nfi'smith, DAVID: Scotch philan- 
throptBt; b. at Glasgow Mar. 21, 1799; d. at Guild- 
ford (30 m. 8.W. of LoadoD) Nov. 17, 183Q. He v/as 
the origiEiator of city misaiona, having established 
the first one, in GlaHgow, 1826. From 1831 to 1828 
be was secretaiy to the united benevolent societies 
of GUbeow, but spent the remainder of his life in 
jnfwg«liing his benevolent schemes. With this in 
Tiow he visited the United Stales and Cansjla in 
1830, eatablishing there many nuEsions and asso- 
eiatidna; and Fmnce, in 1832. He founded the 
London City Bfission in 1S35, and waa ita necretary 
tit) 1837; ia 1837 he formed the British and Foreign 
Mission for the purpose of unifying and propagating 
the worii of city misaions. 
Bnuonurav: J. Cunpbdl. Mtmoirt of David Naimilh. 

LoodoD, IM*: D\B, xl. 111-112. 

lATAUS, DQ-U]'liB, ALEXAKDER (Alexandre 
Hod): French Dominican; Rouen Jan. 19, 1639; P&ris Aug. 21, 1724. He entered the Dominican 
Older in 1655, became teacher of philosophy aii<l 
tbeologj' in the convent of St. Jacques at Paris, and 
bt 1706 provincial. At the instance of Colbert he 
wrote hia Sdeda historicE ecdesiaaticis capita (24 
vols., Paris, 1677-86), to which he later appended 
the history of the Old Testament in six volumes. 
The work ia practically b, series of monographs of th u 
most important points of church history, and the 
faeatinenl is polemic and dogmatic rather than his- 
toric, the more modem opponents of Roman Cath- 
nlirim, especially the Reformed, being attacked. 
"OtB first vdumce won the author high praise at 
Rcme, but bo strong was the anti-papal tendency 
of the later volumes that Innocent XI., by a decree 
o* July 13, I6S1, forbade his writings to be read 
under pain of excommunication. Nutalis refused 
to Bubmit and published a defense in 1099. His 
histoiy was edited nith emendations and disserta- 
tions directed against himself by Roncnglia at 
Luoca in 1734, and was then removed from the In- 
dex by Benedict XIII. Other editions appeared at 
Lucca in 1749 aqq., Venice in 1778 sqq., and Blngen 
in 1781. Another important work of Natalis is the 
Thtalogia dogmatica et Tnoralia (10 vols., Paris, 1693, 
aod often). (G. UHLHOHNt-) 

Bouooupst: J. Quflit uid J. (jcbitr<^. Script. ordinU 

da ktmmM iButrm dt Towdti' dt S. Domini^w. v. SOS, 6 
raU.. ib. 1743-40: Nioeron. Mtmnira. ixiii. 

HATHAH; An important prophet of the reign I 
of David whose history is given in II Sam. vii. 1 
■jq,, xii. I aqq.; and I Kings i. In the passage last 
■uimed, Nathan, the former tutor of the prince 
(n Sam. xii. 25), joined Bathshoba, the mother of 
Sdomoa, in inSuencing David to make Solomon his 
sunesaor, both by recalling David's promise to 
Balh-sheba to this effect and by informing David 
ol Adonijah'6 premature asaimiption of royal power. 
The other occasion (II Sam. xii. 1 sqq.) in which 
ffalhan appeared most prominently was after the 
deatb of David'a son by Balhsheba. In this narra- 

tive appears the well-known parable toid by the 
prophet to David, who, after pronouncing judgment, 
received the application of the parable to himself 
in the words " thou art the man " {II Sam. xii, 7). 
The parable is apparently an independent account 
woven into the main story, and there are, accord- 
ingly, two accounts, one prophetic and the other 
more secular. There is, however, no real reason 
to doubt the historicity of either. The third record 
concerning Nathan (II Sam. vii.), though showing 
in its present form traces of Deuteronomic redaction, 
stands on the same basis of probability as II. Sam. 
xii. 1 aqq. From these accounts it appears that 
Nathan was one of the most influential persons at 
the court of David. (R. KrrTEL.) 

HATHARAEL. See Bartholomew. 

HATHUSroS, na-tQ'si-as, MARTIH VOH: Ger- 
man Lutheron; b. at Allhaldensleben (13 m. n.w. 
of Magdeburg), Saxony, Sept. 24, 1843; d. at Greifs- 
wald Mar. 9, 1906. He studied at the universities 
of Heidelberg, Hullo, Tubingen, and Berhn from 
1862 to 1867, and was successively assistant preacher 
at Wemigerode (1869-73), pastor at Quedlinburg 
(1873-S,';) an<I Barmen (1885-88), and professor of 
practical theology at the University of Greifswold 
(I8SS-1906). Hia principal works are: Timolhettt, 
ein Ratg^er far junge Theotogen in Bildem hub dem 
Lebcn (Leipaic, 1881); Natvrwiesenschaft wid Phi- 
loaophie (Heilbronn, 1883); Katechismua-Prediglen 
(2 vols., Leipsio, 1883-84); Das Weten der TFiMen- 
gchaft ttnd ihre Wendung auf die Religion (1885); 
Die Verfassung der evangeli»chen Kirche und die 
nmicatoi Veriuche tu ihrer Verbe»aerung in Prrutaen 
(1888); Milarbeii der Kirche an der LO»iing der so- 
tialen Frage (2 vols., 1893-94); Die Kemfrage im 
Slrtit far da» Apoatolikum (Heilbronn, 1893); Die 
Inapiraiion der heiligen Schrift und die hitttyrUckB 
Krilik (1805); Die chrietlich-eociate Idee der Refor- 
matiori'Zeit and ihre Vorge«rhiiAUi (GUtersloh, 1897) ; 
Ueber die viiasemchaftiicke und religidse Gewiiekeil 
(Heilbronn, 1902); and Handbueh dee kirchlichen 
Uiterrithlii nach Ziel, Inhalt und Form (3 vols., 
Leipsic, 1903-04). 


Catholics, Hi., §2. 

KATIOMAL COVEBAHT (1638). See Cove- 

RATUBAL LAW: In an ethical sense (for 
another sense, see Nature, Laws of), those abso- 
lute and universally valid imperatives that are in- 
nate in the reason of every individual 
Stoic and necessarily come into conscious- 
Origin, ne.ia with the dex-elopraent of the 
mind. This thought originated with 
the SloicH (see Stoicism). They wished to show 
that " the good " i.i not binding because of arbitrary 
human statute, but because of inner necessity, and 
to establish, in contrast to the former ethical par- 

Natural Law 



ticularism, a system of morals binding on everyone. 
The thought was plausible by reason of the fact 
that among the peoples of the earth a far-reaching 
unanimity in moral judgment actually prevailed. 
This agreement seemed merely to have been brought 
to light by social intercourse, though in reality it 
had been, for the most part, created by such inter- 
course. The vehicle for the development of the 
thought was metaphysics and the psychology of 
the idealistic philosophy. By converting Plato's 
archetjrpal " ideas " into immanent, active " logoi " 
and combining these into a single ** logos," which 
they identified with the Godhead, the Stoics reached 
the conception of a divine world-reason, of which 
the reason of the individual is a part. It manifests 
itself in the dictates of finite reason as the impera- 
tive law of the Godhead. Knowledge of this natural 
moral law is instinctive and a priori, it being per- 
ceived by means of intuitively evident '* common 
notions" (Gk. koinai ennoiai). Although these 
ideas were designated as ** innate " (emphyUn) be- 
fore Cicero's time, he was really the first so to re- 
gard this original outfit of the practical reason, and, 
too, not only in embryo but also in general outline, 
iniismuch as the germs of moral laws are found in 
the animal impulses to procreation and care for 
the young, and since the four cardinal virtues 
are already pre-formed in the sense of percep- 
tion for truth, social order, size and independ- 
ence, and fitness and harmony. Under the 
emperors this thought was taken up in Roman 
jurisprudence, when Roman society had ex- 
changed its national for a cosmopolitan character. 
To the arbitrary laws of man, changing vnth time 
and place, conditioned by practical considerations, 
and not always perfect, it opposes the natural 
law, sanctioned by God, universally valid and un- 
changeable — the perfect law, and the standard for 
all statute-law. 

This Stoic conception was brought into Christian 
theology by the apologists to establish the truth of 
revelation and fix a boundary between 
In Christianity and Judaism. Their argu- 
Christian ment was, that the eternal, universal. 
Theology, natural law, because it had been ob- 
scured by sin, was publicly promul- 
gated by Moses and afterward confirmed by Christ, 
i^dth the repeal of the ceremonial and political ad- 
juncts. At first the natural moral law, this funda- 
mental postulate of Christianity, which was in- 
tended to explain, establish, and put into effect the 
ethical knowledge already at hand, was conceived 
as an original endowment of the reason. Then the 
natural moral law, together ^ith the conception of 
natural right, became in the church system the 
foundation of the new law revealed in Christ, which 
takes into account the supernatural purpose of man. 
This new law transcends both the natural and the 
Mosaic law, in that it applies to intention as well 
as to overt act, demands spiritual acts that culti- 
vate grace, and finally gives the Evangelical 
Counsels (see Consilia Evangelica). The fact 
that the natural law was regarded as obscured 
gave to the Church, as the custodian of revealed 
law, the control and administration of the laws of 
the land. 

In contrast to the Roman Catholic conception of 
Christianity as nova lex, the Reformation recQgniies 

Jesus as Redeemer only, and not as 
In the law-giver. It sees in the natural law 
Refor- the recognition of man's supernatural 
mation. destiny, which is imparted to him with 

the creation of the reasoning faculty; 
and, consequently, it includes in natural law, and 
the Mosaic law confirming the same, the highest de- 
mands of Christianity; viz., humility, dependence, 
humble trust in God, etc. Since, however, as re- 
gards its content, the natural law is obscured and 
requires the grace of God to make it appear in all 
its splendor, the assertion that it is innate is noth- 
ing but an expression of the feeling of obligation 
to meet the Christian demand. If this is to move 
conscience, then the soul must be formed in accord- 
ance with it. Fiurther, the conception of natural 
law served in the conflict ¥dth the visionaries to 
separate the parts of the Mosaic law that were uni- 
versally binding from those that were binding on 
the Jews alone. Finally, it established the inde- 
pendence of the temporal authorities as opposed 
to the Church, since the external acts it r^ulates 
are discovered by the reason. With Melanchthon 
comes the title under which this humane basis of 
Greco-Roman ethics was used to teach the Gospd 
and prove its truth. In the sequel natural right 
and natural moral law became the means of eman- 
cipation from the continued activity of Roman 
Catholic motives in Protestantism. 

The theocratic conception of the State as the 
guardian of both tables made the State responsible 

for the true worship of God and the 

Further salvation of its subjects. Now, through 

Develop- the further development of the idea of 

ment natural law, a new conception gains 

the ascendency, which regards the 
State as a human institution having as its object 
temporal peace. Revelation had always shown 
itself as a source of freedom of personality, and, at 
the same time, as the tyrannizing domination of a 
foreign will. As a means of emancipation from this 
supernatural authority of revelation representatives 
of Deism and the Enlightenment (qq.v.) made use 
of the traditional innate moral law. In philosoph- 
ical ethics rationalism and empiricism are here op- 
posed to each other. According to the rationalistic 
view, either the truth of absolute ethical impera- 
tives, like that of mathematical and logical axioms, 
brings its evidence to conscience intuitively, or else, 
as Kant maintains, the moral law followed from 
the formal power of the reason to apprehend the 
unconditioned or posit unity. On the other hand, 
the empiricists hold that the moral law is only the 
sum total of those rules of life, learned by experi- 
ence, which, if followed, will bring the greatest 
possible amount of satisfaction to a pre-moral in- 
stinct, either the egoistic, the altruistic, or both. 
The fact that among different peoples, and in differ- 
ent ages, the moral law has not always had the 
same coTit<>nt, has made it evident that the moral 
consciousness has had a history, that it is the re- 
sult of a gradual development. With this new view- 
point the old antagonism between rationalism and 
empiricism becomes absorbed in that between ideal- 


Katoral Law 

iBm and erolutioniflm. While idealism conceives of 
the miDd as the immanent cause of this develop- 
ment, evolutionism deduces these changes from 
external factors, after the analogy of the methods 
of natural science (see Evolution). Recognizing 
that it is not the origin of the moral law that gives 
to it its validity, but rather its power to lift the per- 
sonality to a higher plane, even Christian theology 
has now abandoned the fundamental part of the 
doctrine of an innate moral law. The supposed 
innate moral law is completely subject to the changes 
of history, in which Christian revelation proves itself 
by its fruits. See Ethics. J. GoTTSCHicKf. 

Bauocou^PHT: M. Voict, Die Lthre vom iua nafura/e, vol. 
L, Lnpsie, 1859; K. Hadenbrand, GeackiehU tmd SytUm 
dgr Rtcku- %tnd StaattphUoaophie, vol. i., ib. I860: E. 
Zdler* Die PhUoeophie der Oriechm^ vol. iii., part 1, ib. 
1880. Eog. tnuial., London, 1880-^1; H. Drununond, 
Natmal Law in the Spiriiual World, London. 1883, and 
ofUn; F. Jodl. GeeehichU der Ethik, Stuttgart, 1889; H. 
WcMB, Einleiiuna in die ehriaUichen Ethik, Leipsic, 1890; 
B. Trtltach, Vemunft und Offenbaruno bei J. Gerard und 
Maianehihon, Gdttingen, 1891; T. Elaenhaus, Weaen und 
BmUUhuno dea Oeieiaaena, vol. i., Leipsic, 1894. 

HATURAL THEOLOGY: The favorite term in 
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries designating 
the knowledge of God drawn from nature in dis- 
tinction from the knowledge of God contained in 
revdation. This division of theology into natural 
and revealed had its roots in the scholastic distinc- 
tioQ between the two truths, one derived from 
nature by the use of the Aristotelian logic, subject 
to the authority of the Church, the other, truth 
above reason, revealed by God but formulated and 
tsQ^t solely by authority of the Chureh (see Al- 
BEBTD8 Maokus; SCHOLASTICISM). The dclsts re- 
lied exclusively on natural theology, on the ground 
that the being and attributes of God could be ex- 
bauatively ascertained from the constitution and 
eouiae of the world, thus superseding the necessity 
of supernatural revelation (see Deism). David 
Hume, by his theory of knowledge, proved that 
even this knowledge was too precarious for rational 
certitude. On the other hand, Bishop Butler (Anal- 
ogy of Religion, London, 1736 and often) maintained 
that natural and revealed religion were so far one 
that the truths of natural theology provided a basis 
for the characteristic truths of the Christian faith, 
■uch as miracles, the incarnation, and redemption. 
Later, the wisdom, power, and even the goodness 
of God were held to be demonstrable by the proc- 
cflses of natural theology (S. Clarke, A Demonstrc^ 
Hon of the Being and Attribules of God, London, 
1705; Wm. Paley, Natural Theology, ib. 1802; 
Bridgewaier Treatises, q.v.). The function and 
name of natural theology continued in vogue until 
the latter portion of the last century (see God, 
IV.; and consult T. Chalmers, Natural Theology, 
Edinburgh, 1849; A. P. Chadboume, Lectures on 
Xatural Theology, New York, 1867; E. H. Gillett, 
God in Human Thought, or Natural Theology, ib. 
1874; W. Jackson, Philosophy of Natural Theology, 
London, 1874; J. H. Kennedy, Natural Theology 
and Modem Thought, ib. 1891; G. C. Stokes, Nat- 
ural Theology, ib. 1891; G. P. Fisher, Manual of 
Natural Theology, New York, 1893). This habit of 
thought has, however, been strongly opposed by 
Ritschl and bis school. Relying on Kant's distinc- 

tion between the pure and the practical reason, 
they seek the source of the knowledge of God not 
through the theoretic judgments of science or phi- 
losophy, but only through value- judgments to 
which revelation is addressed. Nature being im- 
personal can neither receive nor communicate the 
personal redemptive disclosure of God which man 
needs for reconciliation ¥dth him; this is to be 
sought ultimately only in Christ and the Christian 
community. Recent thought tends to yet another 
mode of viewing the whole subject. The distinction 
between natiu*al and supernatural, in which natural 
theology arose and flourished, is effaced. Ruling 
ideas are: philosophical monism; psycho-physics 
tending to the personal interpretation of reality; evo- 
lution involving and revealing the unity of the world; 
the divine immanence as a postulate of religious 
thought. Moreover, the material included in natural 
theology is treated from a different point of view, as, 
e.g., the science of religion (C. P. Tiele, Elements of 
the Science of Religion, New York, 1897; J. Caird, 
Philosophy of iJeZi^ion, Edmburgh, 1880; O. Pflei- 
derer. Philosophy of Religion, London, 1886; G. T. 
Ladd, Philosophy of Religion, New York, 1905; H. 
HOffding, Philosophy of Religion, London, 1906); 
apologetics (A. B. "Bruce, Apologetics, New York, 
1892; G. B. Foster, The Finality of the Christian 
Religion, Chicago, 1906); theism (Samuel Harris, 
Philosophical Basis of Theism, New York, 1886; 
B. P. Bowne, Theism, ib. 1902); or individual as- 
pects of fundamental religious questions are dis- 
cussed with reference, e. g., to psychology (E. D. 
Starbuck, Psychology of Religion, London, 1899; 
G. A. Coe, The Spiritual Life, New York, 1900; 
W. James, Varieties of Religious Experience, ib. 
1902) ; religion (L. H. Jordan, Comparative Religion, 
Its Genesis and Growth, Edinburgh, 1905; A. Saba- 
tier. Religions of Authority and Religions of the Spirit, 
New York, 1906); Christianity (A. Hamack, What 
is Christianity? London, 1901); metaphysics (J. 
Royce, The World and the Individual, New York, 
1900-01); science (J. LeConte, Evolution and Its 
Relation to Religious Thought, New York, 1894; 
E. Caird, The Evolution of Religion, London, 1893); 
history (A. Menzies, History of Religion, London, 
1895; W. Bousset, Das Wesen der Religion, darge- 
steUt in ihrer Geschichie, Halle, 1904). 

C. A. Beckwith. 

Bxbuoorapht: Beada the works mentioned in the text, 
the reader may oonaiJt: J. A. Thomas. The Bible of No- 
fur», London, 1008; and R. Otto, Naturaliam and Rdigion, 
ib. 1909. 

NATURE, LAWS OF: In general a law is a 
statement of the rule according to which something 
either necessarily takes place, as in external nature, 
or ought to take place, as in the normative sciences. 
While the laws of logic or ethics are often violated, 
no exception to the law of gravitation has ever been 
observed. Indeed, it is this assumed element of 
necessity that distinguishes the laws of nature from 
the recognized rules of thought, conduct, etc. 

However, it is by no means certain to what extent 
laws of nature, e.g., that of mechanical causation, 
find application; and it is still a mooted question 
whether they control psychical life and the prog- 
ress of history, as well as physical happenings, or 



3 natural 
which all 
s likewise 

ivbcthcr a. lelcoloeical element must be reckoned 
with. Further, since such lawa are derived largely 
from experience, which is liighly diversified and 
eeemingly endless, it is impossible to Iik upon u 
limited number of laws of nature and say that they 
are all. Attempts tt> set up a single law, upon which 
all natural processes depend, have proved ai in- 
effectual as similar nttempU of metaphysicians to 
reduce all ontology to some one formal proposition. 
In both castes tlie unifying principle is empty and 
abstract, and its truth is denied by the very mul- 
tiplicity of existence. The lav ' ' ' 
been taken as auch a general formula; 
■een at once that this transcends nu 
events. Evolution, as the single law t< 
natural events are to be subordinate, 
uneatisfactory. It would also control all psychical 
life, individual and social, as w*ell as natural pbe- 
vomena. Merely with such general formulas very 
little would have been aceomplislied by science; 
for they really give no explanation of phenomena. 
In the very conception of event and phenomenon, 
evolution and cauaution are already assumed. Even 
from the law of the conservation of energy, which 
seems to have more content than the two just men- 
tioned, it is impossible to deduce the single laws 
that actually govern natural events. 

Attempts to formulate the laws of nature reach 
far back into antiquity. In the philosophy o( An- 
aximander and Heraclitus the eternal flux of things 
expresBes the most general law; and similarly An- 
aximenea. Plato and Aristotle speak of laws of 
nature, but do not formulate them. Astolbeorigin 
ot these laws, there are two familiar views. Accord- 
ing to the first, wliich originated with Anaxagoros, 
they were given to the world by the Godhead. 
Thus hold both deists and thcists. According 
to the second, or nnturalietic, view, which orig- 
inated with Democritus, these laws are et«mal and 
immanent in the world. Thus held Spinoza. Kant 
opposed both these views. He taught that man is 
not only his own law-giver in the practical field, but 
that he is even the law-giver of nature, since all the 
concepts, axioms, and laws which make possible a 
eynthcsis of perceptions, or experience, or science 
based upon experience, are immanent in his under- 
standing. While there may be an a priori element in 
the laws of nature, the fact remains that such laws, 
even the most universal, are discovered only on the 
basis of experience. With the lawa of nature must not 
be confusM] Natural Law (q.v.). (M. HeiNZEt) 
Bibuodbapht: G. D. Campbtll (the duVe of Argyll). The 
Rtign <l/ Lav. neit bI., New York. 188.^; F. Schultio. Phil- 
oaophie drr NaturwiantnachaSI. 2 parta, Leipsic. ISSt; H- 
DnaamODd, NaCura! Lirw in thi Spirilunl World, London, 
1SS3 imd otteo: G. D. Cunpbcll, Tic Cnilv "t Nature, ib. 
188*: idera. 7"*' Rrign nf Imw, ib. 1807 nnil ofUm; N. 3. 
EhBler, Tht Inlenitrlaiion of Naturr, Roalon. 1893; O. C. 
ZilDOiEr. UriT dot Wriirt drr NaluJueiHa. riinvni. 1893: 
R. RehricU BaUflhajit Dinar. Einfahnmg in dir Orund- 
ffcMzf drr A'ofiir, Uipnic. 1897; C. H. Crawford. Natunl 
Lau' (lavrming the Mnrial and rmmarlal Worldi. Chiouo, 
1904: E. DuniiErt, Va(ur»M*. Zujall, Vortliurie! Ham- 
biUB, 1008; E. Boutrom, (;d.n- dn Brariff d" Satume- 
itftr* , . . iadtr Pliiltiinpfiir der Gajmu-nrl. Jma, 1007. 

HAUDE, nft'-df", PHILIPPE: Franco-German 
Reformed; b. at Metz Dec. 28, 1664; d. at Beriin 
Mar. 7, 1729. Aa a boy he spent four years as page 
to the count of Weimar at Marksuhl. Attempts 

made here to convert him from the Reformed to the 
Lutheran faith led him to devote himself to theo- 
lo^cal studies, which he continued on his retun 
to Metz. Un the revocation of the Edict of Naotca 
(1685) he fled to Gemiany. In 16Si he seltledat 
Berlin as a teacher of mathematics, becoming pro- 
fessor of mathematics at the Academy of SciencM 
in 1704. His mathematical works are overshadowed 
by his nximerous theological writings. These an 
all devoted to defending the sovereign grace of God 
on a Bupralapsnrian basis. In his Moralt «Mn- 
gClique (2 vols., Berlin, 1699), he attacked natur«l- 
istic ethics, divorced from revealed religion, which 
denied tlie origin of evil in the world. His La Sou- 
vtrairu! Per/eetion de Diru dans sa i/iiiers ojfribiilt 
(2 vols., Amsterdam, 1708) was directed primarily 
against the philosopher Pierre Bayle and the Freudi 
preacher at Berlin, Isaac Jaquelot, the former doubt- 
ing Christianity, the latter being universalistic in 
tendency. The RecacU deg abjectUnu (1700) eou^t 
to show that infralapsorians differ from aupraUp- 
snrians only in phraseology. He renewed his attadt 
on Buyle in Refutation du " Comtneniaire pAflo- 
iophique" (Berlin, 1718). His Exameti de dtvx 
traiUt (2 vols., Amsterdam, 1713) was directed 
against the non-traditional theology of the Copen- 
hagen preacher La Placette and the Swiss theo- 
logian Osterwald. He assailed the mysticism of 
Pierre Poiret in his Orindliche UnierauchuTig der 
mygtischen Tlieologie (Zerbst, 1713) and polemiied 
against the universalistic tendency of the theolog- 
ical faculty of Frankfort in his Theologitche Gedanken 
lifter den Entwurf der Lehre von der Beaehaffenkat 
■und Ordnung der gdtHichen RalffhliiMe (1714). 

(F. W. CuNot) 

Bibuogbaprt: D. H. Heiinc. finfrdpt tw OsKAidUn dtr 
reforniierlm Kirrhe in den jtmtMifich-brandmburffitcAm 
Landem, vnl. ii.. BmLau. I7S5; Nicemn. Mlmoira. vol.ili. 
nAnHBURG, nnum'bilrg, BISHOPRIC OF: Ad 
ancient bishopric in what is now Prussian Saxony, 
founded at the same time and under the same cir- 
cumstances as those of Merseburg and Meissen 
(>;([.v.). The original seat of the bishopric was at 
Zettx. It included the Wendish districts on the 
right bank of the upper Saale. The conversion of 
the inhabitants was a, slow process, and had not 
been completed by the beginning of the twelfth 
century. This accounts for the transference of the 
see from Zeitz to Nanmburg, on the borders of the 
fiermaa-speaking territory, at the instance of Con- 
rad II., which was confirmed by John XIX. in 1028. 
(A. Hauck.) 
The town of Naumburg was presented to the 
bishop at the time of the transfer; but the mar- 
graves of Meissen, nominally protectors of the see, 
kept the secular authority in their own hands until 
Bishop Meinber(d. 1280) established the sovereignty 
of the bishop. In the time of Philip, pal^rave of 
the Rhuie and duke of Bavaria (1517^1), a usually 
non-resident bishop, the Reformation made great 
progress in the district. At hia death the canons 
elected Julius von PSug. the last Roman Catholic 
bishop (1,541-64), whose place was contested by 
Nicholas von Amsdorf. on the strength of consecra- 
tion at the hands of Luther. 

BieUnciRAPRI: C. P. Lppsiui, Gcichii-hU der Biech-'fe dei 

HochaliJU Kaianbura, put i., NiuubuTK, 18W; S. Btaun. 


NADIIBUKG, naum'barg, COnVEnTIDR: An 
svembiy held at Naumburg from Jan. 20 to Feb. 
8, 1561, to unite tbe Prol«stant estates by the Hub- 
Kiiptioa o( the Augsburg Confeeaion, and to dia- 
ctus commoD measurea against the Council of 
Trent, which was sood to be reopened. Since the 
Mcood colloquy of Worms (q.v.) ia 1557 various 
attempt* lud been made to uiilte the Protestants 
(«« Fbamkport Rkcrss). The adherents of 
FUcdus (q.v.) requested a general synod; but the 
Philippiata (q.v.) opposed this plan. During the 
Diet of Augsburg (Mar., 1559), Duke Chriatoph of 
Wurtlemberg proposed a new convention of the 
EvuigelicAl princes, and at a meeting of Duke 
Christopher, Elector Frederick III. of the Pala- 
tinate, and his son-in-law, Duke John Frederick of 
Suooy, at RiUbach, it waa decided that the con- 
venlioa should be held at Naumburg. Landgrave 
FtiiUp, Count-Palatiiiate Wolfgang of Zweibrilcken, 
and Elector August vere also won for the plan. 
The rulers of Wurttemberg and the Palatinate b- 
viled the princes of Upper Germany, while Elector 
August and John Frederick of Saxony invited those 
id North Germany. 

Sereral princes were represented in the conven- 
tion by their councilor)!. From Jan. 20 to Feb. 8 
there were held twenty-one sittings. In accord- 
ance with & preliminary agreement that nothing 
else was t« be discussed but the subscription of the 
Augsbui^ ConfeBsion, Frederick III. of the Palati- 
nate proposed the foUowing points: (1) Compari- 
son erf all editions of the Augsburg Confession in 
order to decide which copy should be subscribed; 
12) tbe drawing up of a preface stating the occa- 
sion and purpose of the meeting; (3) an explana- 
tion to the emperor concerning the purpose of the 
meeting; (4) diacusaion on the question whether 
and how the uninvited counts, lords, and cities were 
to be persuaded to sui>scribe. Immediately differ- 
ence of i^inion arose as to what edition should be 
subscribed; and some demanded also the subscrip- 
tion erf the Sehmalkald Articles. Frederick 111. de- 
manded the subscription of the Latin confession of 
1630, since the corresponding Cierman text con- 
tuned the offensive words, unfer GeOaU des Brolei 
md Weine; which admitted transubstantiation. 
Tbe subscription of the Latin text was in Frederick 'a 
eye e(|Uai lo an implicit acknowledgment of art. x. 
•[ the Vanala, regarding the Ijord's Supper. The 
work of collating the different editions occupied 
two full days. Various points of dispute now 
arose, on the question whether the edition of 1^1 
or 1540 or 1542 should be subscribed, and whether 
the German text in art. x. of the tntcTiaia seemed 
to conflrm transubstantiation. In the mean time 
orthodox theologians had not mitiaed tlie oppor- 
tunity to influence the princes. David Chytra-us 
of Rostock pointed out the Melanchthonian here- 
ms in the Variola and advocated the subscription 
rf the ItivaHata, together with the Sehmalkald Arti- 
cles; and tbe adherents of Flacius sent an epistle 
■Timing ajtaiost any subscription of the Augsburg 
Omfesaion, unless the sutiscnption of the Apology 
tad tbe Scbiaalkald articles were included. The 

assembled princes linally agreed upon the edi- 
tion of 1531, and a preface «as drawn up to be 
sent to the emperor. John Frederick and Ulrich 
of Mecklenburg refused to sign the preface on the 
ground that the obnoxious hcresiea, espeeially those 
of the Sacranientarians, were not specially men- 
tioned and condemned, and that no direct expla- 
nation of tbe disputed articles had been given. Tbe 
sudden and secret departure of John Frederick 
from Naumburg cuiwod great alarm among the 
princes. The preface was signed by the two elec- 
tors, Landgrave Philip of Hesse, Duke Christopher, 
and tiie margrave of Baden. Neither Duke Ulrich 
signed, nor the councilors of the other absent princes, 
as moat of them had already departed. 

More harmony prevailed in the negotiations re- 
garding tlie Council of Trent. Two papal legates 
and an imperial embajtsy arrived at Naumburg. 
When it was discovered that the papal briefs in- 
viting the Protestant princes to participate in the 
Council of Trent began with the words Dilecto 
filio (" [to my] beloved son "), they were sent back 
unopened, with the remark that the Protestant 
princes were not, and would never be, the sons 
of the pope. The convention finally answered tbe 
emperor and the pope to the effect that none of its 
number would participate in the Council of Trent, 
that tbey wanted a national German council in 
which they could not only be heard, but also have 

At the entreaty of the persecuted French Hugue- 
nots, the assembled princes sent letters of interces- 
sion to King Charles IX. and King Anthony of 
Navarre. There appeared an ambassador from 
Queen p;iizabeth of England, who, in consideration 
of the coalition of the Roman Catliolic powers, 
urged the necessity of a closer union of the Evan- 
gelicals and proposed steps to be taken for the 
purpose of a mutual agreement in regard to the 
Council of Trent. The princes promised to comply 
with her «-ishcs, and also notified the king of Den- 
mark of their attitude toward a council. Tbe 
princes pledgetl themselves to induce each one of 
their counts, lords, and cities to subscribe the Augs- 
burg Confession together with the preface. For the 
preservation of peace they resolved upon a careful 
censorship of new writings and the suppression of 
all libelous Uterature. Thus the convention came 
to an end ; but the work of peace was soon destroyed 
by the opposition of John Frederick of Saxony and 
by the zealoias labors of the anti-PhiUppist theo- 
logians. At the Convention of LUneburg in July 
of the same year the leading theologians of Lilbcck, 
Bremen, Hamburg, Rostock, Magdeburg, and 
firunswick unanimously rejected the Naumburg 
preface and asked for a severe condemnation of the 
heresies. The princes of Lower Saxony likewise 
rejected the preface. The only palpable result of 
the Naumbuig Convention was a common protest 
against pope and council. (G. KaweraV.) 

Bibudoiupht: Th?re are three monoitrapbii on tbe nib- 

jeot: n. P. Hflnn, Hirfon'o c/m r.>n ilrnm ■ranoj/McA™ 

SUIndm isei fu Naumbiav arhaltmm CantmU, Fmnkfoit. 

17D4; J. H. Oelbke, Drr AntimfturBrr FOrilmliul, Leipsic. 

I7S3: R. C&linich. Drr Naumburatr Fllriirnlae. Goths. 

1870. CoonuJt furtbir: U. Eepix, Oachichie der drtOKken 

frvlrHaiitiima, I5SS-SI. i. 30« ««., MsrhurK, 1S52; A. 

BluclEboha, Brie{t FriedricAt da Frammat. i. 154 stn-i 




nrunsw-ick, 18G8; idem, Friedrich der Fromme, pp. 79 
nqq., Ndrdlingen, 1879; O. Zdckler, Die Augthurger Kon- 
fesftion, pp. 48 sqq., Frankfort, 1870; B. Kugler, ChrU- 
toph Herzog tu WUrttemberg, ii. 183 sqq., Stutte^rt. 1872; 
M. Ritter, Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Gegenrefor- 
mation, i. 153-154, 209 sqq., ib. 1889; A. HeidcDhaim, 
Die Unionspolitik Jjandgraf Philippe von Heseen, 1667- 
166S, pp. 185-286, Halle, 1890. 

Roman Catholic; b. at Waischenfeld, Upper Fran- 
conia, Bavaria, 1480; d. at Trent Feb. 6, 1552. He 
seems to have taught for a time at Nuremberg, and 
was then a private tutor of a son of Schwartzenbei^g, 
first at Leipsic, and then at Pavia and Padua, where 
he received his doctorate in law in 1523. In 1524 he 
went to Germany as secretary to Cardinal Lorenzo 
Campeggio (q.v.). The same year, besides being 
commissioned to restore Melanchthon and Erasmus 
to the Roman Catholic Church, he was made papal 
notary and coimt of the Lateran. In 1525 he was 
given the parish of St. Bartholomew, Frankfort, 
which, however, on account of Lutheran opposition, 
he exchanged for the post of cathedral preacher in 
Mainz. Here he became one of the chief Roman 
Catholic preachers and apologists of the Reforma- 
tion period. As preacher and counselor he was ac- 
tive at the Diet of Speyer in 1529. After a year in 
Italy, where he received the theological doctorate 
at Sienna, he went to Vienna as court chaplain and 
councilor to the Emperor Ferdinand. In 1538 he 
was made bishop coadjutor of Vienna, but still 
preached regularly before the court. In 1539 he 
published at Leipsic brief postilla of the Gospels 
to replace those of Luther. At the emperor's re- 
quest, Nausea took part in the Hagenau conference 
in 1540, and in the same year delivered at Worms 
his Hortatio ad ineundam in Christiana rdigume 
concordiam (Mainz, 1540), in which he urged the 
acceptance of the tradition of the Fathers. In 1541 
he succeeded to the episcopal see of Vienna. His 
attempts at reform within his diocese failed to se- 
cure imperial support; but in 1551 he attended the 
Council of Trent as Ferdinand's orator, taking an 
active part in the debates on the Eucharist, pen- 
ance, and extreme unction, and on Jan. 7, 1552, 
preaching on the mass and the priesthood. His 
works include, besides many sermons: Responaa 
, , . ad aliquot GermaniccB natianis gravamina 
(1538); Catechismua catholicua (1543; 2d ed., Ant- 
werp, 1551); Pastoralium inquisitionum denchi tree 
(Vienna, 1547); and Isagogicon de dericis ordinandis 
(1548). (G. Kawerau.) 

Biblioorapht: A volume of Epietola miscellanea to him 
was publwhed Basel, 1551. Consult: the biography by 
J. Metzner, RegcnsburK. 1884; T. Wiedemaon, Geschichte 
der Reformation und OegenreformcUion im Ixinde urUer der 
Enns, i. 227 sqq., ii. 27 sqq., Pra*?ue, 1878-80; W. Frie- 
densburg, in ZKG, xx (1899). 500 sqq., xxi (1900), 537 
sqq.; ADB, Txiii. 321 sqq.; KL, ix. 50 sqq. 


Hebrew Names for Ships (§1). 
Form, Construction, and Tackle (J 2). 
Early Hebrew Navigation. Tarshish (5 3). 
Later Hebrew Navigation (§ 4). 

The most frequent name for ship in the Old Tes- 
tament is 'oni, a collective, *oniyyah being a noun 
of individuality. It is applied to vessels of the most 
various sizes. In Job ix. 26 the expression " swift 

ships '' is probably identical in meaning with the 

" vessels of bulrushes '' of Isa. xviii. 2, and recalls 

the boats known, e.g., to Pliny (Hist. 

1. Hebrew naturalis, xiii. 21 sqq.), and still used in 
Names the Sudan, made out of pap3rru8 reeds. 

for Ships. They are practically raits of no 
great size, made of bundles of reeds 
tied together and kept in motion with poles or 
short oars. But the word *an% is used with qualify- 
ing words (** ships of the sea," Ezek. xxvii. 9; 
" ships of Tarshish," Ezek. xxvii. 25) to denote 
vessels which sail the open seas. A rarer word b 
zi (Num. xxiv. 24; Isa. xxxiii. 21; Ezek. xxx. 29; 
Dan. xi. 30), which in Daniel and Numbers implies 
ships of war, probably also in Isaiah, but the pas- 
sage in Ezekiel is better represented by " swift 
ships." The word sephinah is found only in Jonah 
i. 5. 

Exceedingly instructive is the passage Ezek. 
xxvii. l-9a, 25-36, in the matter of construction, 
equipment, and manning of vessels. Tyre is pic- 
tured as a splendid ship of commerce. 

2. Form, The double planks are of cypress 
Construction, brought from Senir (Hermon); the 

and Tackle, mast is of cedar of Lebanon, while the 
oars are of oak brought from Bashan; 
the deck (or cabin?) is of " te'asahur " wood inlaid 
with ivory, brought from " the isles of Chittim " 
(a name derived originally from Cition in Cyprus, 
and then applied generally to the islands and coasts 
of the Mediterranean). The sail is of some valuable 
material wrought in Fjgypt and decorated with 
figures which had some connection with the busi- 
ness or the importance of the ship. The awning is 
of blue and purple. The word which is rendered 
'' mariners " in verse 27 (mallah) is not to be con- 
nected with the word for salt (mdah), but with the 
Babylonian malahu, " sailors." A part of the ship's 
company consisted of " pilots " (i.e., the sailors 
who managed the tackle); and a part, of rowers. 
There can be no doubt that the prophet who penned 
this picture drew upon his knowledge of Phenician 
shipping, and the account is the more valuable 
since no other reports are known of the material and 
equipment of a Phenician vessel. There are, how- 
ever, pictured on a relief from Sennacherib's palace 
at Nineveh vessels which are probably of Phenician 
origin. Two kinds of ships appear, one of which is 
a war vessel, equipped ¥dth a ram. They have two 
banks of oars, four in each bank, and each has two 
steering oars or ruddere toward the stem, one on 
each side. Each ship has one mast and carries a 
yard, the ends of which are connected with the 
mast by ropes. The sail is apparently four-cornered, 
and from it one rope is carried to the bow and two 
to the stem. The other kind of ship is without the 
ram, is somewhat shorter and decidedly roimded in 
shape. This has no mast or tackle; three men on 
board are equipped with two spears each; and 
other general characteristics indicate that this is a 
second and smaller variety of war vessel. The mer- 
chant vessels were probably of this latter t3rpe, 
shorter and rounder, equipped with mast, stays, 
yard, sail, and steering oars, sometimes also oars 
for propulsion, though these could hardly be used 
for heavy ships of burden. It is likely that the bow 




decorated with some device which served also 
aa a maik of identification; Greek and Roman 
writers say that Phenician ships carried the head 
of a horse at the bow, as did an Assyrian ship 
figured in the palace of Sargon at Khorsabad. 

The Hebrews of the highlands of Palestine had 
necessarily nothing to do with seafaring matters. 
Whether the smaller tribes which for 
3. Eariy a time or always had their homes by 
Hebrew the sea engaged in marine business the 
HavigAtion. notices in Gen. xlix. 13 and Judges v. 
Tarshish. 17 do not make sufficiently clear. Out- 
side of these, the reigns of David and 
Solomon seem to have been the first period when 
Hebrews used the sea, being then in close connec- 
tion with the Phenicians. The embassies between 
Jerusalem and Tyre and the exchange of commodi- 
ties imply sea traffic (II Sam. v. 11; I Kings v. 15 
sqq., ix. 11, 14). Hiram sent the timbers needed 
by Solomon in rafts (I Kings v. 9), and the Chron- 
icler asserts that these came to Joppa (II Chron. 
ii. 16); possibly Solomon had control of the trade 
routes and so of the road to Joppa, though it is 
more likely that Dor (see Philistines) was the port 
used, since this is known to have been in the region 
already subject to Solomon. From Elath or from 
Eziongeber traffic was carried on with Ophir (q.v.). 
Tarshish was also a port to which ships sailed. The 
Old Testament does not make clear where Tarshish 
lay, except that it was somewhere in the West, either 
on the Mediterranean or still farther west. It is 
mentioned as belonging to the islands or coast lands 
of the Mediterranean, known as of importance and 
celebrated by Sidonian seafarers, as belonging to 
the Greeks (Isa. xxiii. 1, Ix. 9; Ezek. xxvii. 12, 25; 
Gen. X. 4), and as reached by sailing from Joppa 
(Jonah i. 3); Isa. Ixvi. 19 implies that its distance 
was great. Eusebius and Jerome did not know 
where it was, but thought of Tarsus, and it was also 
located at Carthage and in India. The identifica- 
tloii which has the best authority is Tartessus in 
Spain, on the river Guadalquivir, on which was 
the Phenician colony of Gadir (Gadeira, Gades, 
Cadiz), founded according to the Romans about 
IlOO B.C. Greeks from Phocsea settled at Tarshish 
c. 600 B.C., since the control of the region by the 
Phenicians ceased about 700 B.C. because of their 
wars with the Assyrians. But between 500 and 300 
the Carthaginians held Gades. The earlier passages 
in the Old Testament assign Tarshish to the 
Phenicians, while later passages (P in Gen. x. 4) 
redcon it to the Greeks, and this is significant. It 
is noteworthy that the wares said to be from 
Tarshish were those of Tartessus. It is reported of 
Solomon in I Kings x. 22 that he had *' ships of 
Tarshish " which made a trip every three years, and 
the passage gives the lading; the parallel text 
(II Chron. ix. 21) affirms that the ships sailed to 
Tarshish. It has been supposed that the expression 
" ships of Tarshish " merely means " great sea- 
going vessels," which is indeed the case in, e.g., Isa. 
ii. 16; Ps. xlviii. 7. But the passage in Kings is to 
be taken as expressing ships which sailed to Tarshish 
in company with the ships of Hiram on the Med- 
iterranean, and Dor must have been the home port. 
The time consumed indicates a great distance. But 

in the Greco-Roman times the passage from Tyre to 
Tarshish consumed about twenty-four days, there- 
fore it took perhaps thirty days in Solomon's time. 
Probably the meaning is that during the first sum- 
mer the outward voyage was made, the lading was 
secured during the second summer, and the return 
journey was made in the third, since during the 
stormy season the sea was not traversed, and stops 
were probably made at many ports on the way. 
Closer conclusions as to the merchandise can not be 
reached from the passage under discussion, since it 
is not said that these came only from Tarshish, and 
possibly Northern Africa was a second source whence 
the wares were derived. From I Kings xxii. 48- 
49 and II Chron. xx. 35-37 other conclusions fol- 
low. The first of these passages clearly means by 
" ships of Tarshish '' vessels like those which sailed 
to that port, and the Chronicler again affirms that 
they sailed from Eziongeber to Tarshish. This was 
indeed not impossible if the route by way of the 
Nile and a canal to the Red Sea be thought of. 
But it is probable that the thought of the earlier 
passage (I Kings xxii. 48) ruled the statement of 
the supposed facts. 

Of Azariah it is reported in II Kings xiv. 21-22 
that he regained Elath, though it was soon recovered 
from the Jews (II Kings xvi. 6) ; but the Jews who 
were there may have engaged in navigation. Noth- 
ing is said of participation by the northern kingdom 
in the commerce of the Phenicians 
4. Later during the alliance between the dy- 
Hebrew nasty of Omri with that of Tjrre. The 
Navigation, oracle on Issachar and Zebulun in 
Deut. xxxiii. 18-19 necessitates par- 
ticipation in sea traffic on the part of the latter at 
least, with the Bay of Accho as the point of de- 
parture. Similarly Hos. xii. 7-8, implying that 
Hebrews had learned the ways of the Canaanites, 
involves the interpretation that the former partici- 
pated in commerce by sea, though of course only a 
part of the population was so engaged. For post- 
exilic times there are indications such as Ps. cvii. 
23-30. Jonah i. gives a fair idea of the ideas of 
mariners of antiquity concerning the causes of 
storms; Prov. xxxi. 14 compares the prudence of 
the good housewife with the management of a ship; 
Eccles. xi. 1 may refer to traffic by sea; Ecclus. 
xxxiv. 9-16 hints at a sea voyage; the late passage 
Isa. xxxiii. 23 takes its figures from the tackle of a 
ship. Simon the Maccabee made Joppa a Hebrew 
port in 145 B.C. (see Philistines) ; Josephus (Ant., 
XIV., X.) reports decrees of the Romans which im- 
ply that the Jews had dealings on the sea, and Hyr- 
canus charged his brother Aristobulus before 
Pompey with permitting sea-robbery to exist, and in 
War, II., xxi. 8 mentions 330 (230?) boats on the Sea 
of Tiberias, while the Gospels speak frequently of the 
fisheries there. The account in Acts xxvii.-xxviii. 
of Paul's journey is valuable for the new light it 
affords on sea travel. Ships had by this time 
reached a considerable size, the Isis of Alexandria 
being 180 feet long, forty-five feet beam, and 
forty-three and a half feet deep, giving a tonnage 
of about 2,700. Such ships carried a foremast, 
used also probably as a crane; besides the mainsail 
and the foresail, a topsail was sometimes carried.' 





At tlie stern was the flagstaff from which the pen- 
nant flew. The rudder could be unshipped either 
when in harbor or diuing severe storms. Some 
ships carried several anchors (Acts xxvii. 29), 
though sometimes heavy stones were used. Exact- 
ness in direction was unattainable in early naviga- 
tion, the course being laid by the stars, and only 
dead reckoning of a sort was available, though a 
certain facility in calculating the ship's position was 
gained by practise, and charts were in the possession 
of sailors. On account of the necessity of sailing 
under clear skies, navigation was as a rule suspended 
between October and the spring. The ''under- 
girding '' of the ship (Acts xxvii. 17) is understood 
in two ways; one is the stretching of a strong rope 
around the i^p just above the water line, the other 
places the rope amidship, passuig under the keel and 
over the bulwarks and deck. The latter method was 
especially adapted to a ship of burden which carried 
its freight chiefly in the waist. (H. Guthe). 

Bibuoorapbt: On the names consult: S. Fr&nkel, Die 
aramHinchen FremdwOrier im Arabiaehent pp. 209 sqq., 
Leyden, 1886; E. Kautssch, Die Aramaiamen im A. 7., 
part i., Halle, 1902. On form and oonstruction: C. Torr, 
Ancient Ships, Cambridsc», 1894; A. Jal, ArchMogie 
navale, Paris, 1840; A. Erman, Life in Ancient Eovpt, 
London, 1894. On Tarshish: F. C. Movers, Die Phoni- 
cier, ii. 2, pp. 588 sqq., 3, pp. 35 sqq., 92 sqq., Berlin, 
1850-56; Q. Oppert. in Zeitechrift fUr Ethnoloffie, xxxv 
(1903), 50-72, 212-265. Light on the naval affairs of 
Greek and Roman times may be found in: J. Smith, 
Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, London, 1880; A. 
BOokh, Urkunden aber doe Seeweaen dee aUiechen SUuUee, 
Beriin, 1840; A. Breusing, Die Nautik der Alien, Bremen, 
1886; J. Vars, L*Art nautique done rantiquiU, dPaprU 
A. Breuaino* Paris, 1887; H. Balmer, Die Romfahrt dea 
Apoatda Paulua und die Seefahrtakunde im rfimiachen 
KaiaerzeUaUer, Bem-M Onchenbuchsee, 1905. In general: 
F. Vigouroux, Le Nouveau Tealament et lea dSeouveriea 
archioloffiquea modemea, pp. 321-350, Paris, 1896; idem, 
Dieiionnaire dela Bible, fasc. xxviii., cols. 1494-1515 (two 
excellent articles, with reproductions of Assyrian, Exyp- 
tian, and Roman monuments); DB, ii. 105, iv. 505-506, 
683-685; EB, iv. 4477-4484; JE, ix. 193-194. 

tologist; b. at Geneva June 14, 1844. Pie studied in 
Geneva, London, and Paris, and being interested in 
Egyptology sat under Lepsius at Berlin. In 1869 
he made his first visit in Egypt. Since 1882 be has 
been connected with the Egypt Exploration Fund 
(q.v.) and has published many remarkable papers 
through it (see the list of publications in the article 
Egypt Exploration Fund). His first contribu- 
tion (1885) attracted wide attention since in it he 
detailed his investigation of the store cities of 
Pithom and the route of the Exodus, which he 
thought he had determined. In 1874 he was en- 
trusted by the Congress of Orientalists in London 
¥dth a new edition of the text of the Book of the 
Dead and published the same, Das dgyptiache Tod- 
tenbuch der 18. bia SO. Dyruutie (Berlin, 1886). In 
1891 he became professor of Egyptology in the 
University of Geneva. He is the author also of T?ie 
Old Egyptian Faiih (London, 1910). 

NAVILLE, JULES ERNEST: Swiss philosopher 
and theologian; b. at Chancy in the canton of 
Geneva Dec. 13, 1816; d. in Geneva May 27, 1909. 
He was educated in Geneva and in Germany, 
was professor of philosophy in the University of 

Geneva from 1840 till 1846, when he lost his 
place in consequence of the Revolution, but was 
from 1860 till 1890 professor of apologetics and 
then till death honorary professor. His writing^ 
on religious and philosophical subjects em- 
brace Maine de Biran, ea vie el sea pensie^ (Paris, 
1857, 3d ed. 1874); La vie itemeOe (1861, 2d ed. 
1862; German transl. licipsic, 1863; Eng. transl., 
Life Eternal, London, 1863); Madame SweUhine 
(a Russian convert to Protestantism; 1863, 2d ed. 
1864); Le Ph-e clleete (1865, 3d ed. 1880; German 
transl., Leipsic, 1865; Eng. transl.. The Heavenly 
Father, Lectures an Modem Atheism, London, 1865; 
Greek transl., C])yprus, 1893) ; Le Devoir (Lausanne, 
1868; German transl., 1869); Le Problem du mal 
(1868, 2d ed. 1869; German transl., Jena, 1871; 
Eng. transl.. The Problem of Evil, Edinburgh, 
1871) ; U£gliae romaine et la liberte des cuUes (Geneva, 
1878); Le Christ (1878, 2d ed. 1880; German transl., 
1880; Eng. transl., The Christ, Edinbuigh, 1880); La 
Logique de Vhypothkse (Paris, 1880); La Physique 
modeme (1883, 2d ed. 1890); Le Libre arbitre (1890, 
2d ed. 1898); La Science et maUrialisme (1S91); La 
Condition sociaU des femmes (Lausanne, 1891) ; Le 
Timoignage du Christ et Vuniti du monde chrUien 
(Geneva, 1893) ; La DifiniHon de la philosophic (1894) ; 
Les Philosophies negatives (1899); Le Credo des chri- 
Hens (1901). 

NATLER, JAMES: English Friend; b. at 
Ardsley (5 m. s. of Leeds), Yorkshire, about 1617; 
d. at Holme (near King's Ripton, 16 m. n.w. of 
Cambridge) Oct., 1660 (buried Oct. 21). He was 
the son of a well-to-do farmer, and received an ex- 
cellent education; on the outbreak of the civil war 
in 1642 he joined the parliamentaiy army, and be- 
came quartermaster; while in the army he became 
a preacher, but was taken ill, returned home, and 
took up farming in 1650. In 1651 he was converted 
under the preaching of George Fox, and became a 
preacher among the Friends, suffering imprisonment 
on the charge of unsound doctrine. His success as 
a preacher disordered his mind; he allowed himself 
to be treated in such a quasi-reverential way, that 
in 1651 he was tried by parliament for blasphemy, 
and condemned to be whipped twice, to be branded, 
to have his tongue bored with a hot iron, and to 
be imprisoned during pleasure, with hard labor. 
After two years in jail he recovered and was re- 
leased and received into the confidenoe of the 
Friends. He was a collaborator with George 
Fox (q.v.) in the production of Quaker tracts, and 
his Writings were published in a collected edition 
(London, 1716). 

Bibuoorapht: J. Deacon, The Qrand Impoalor Examined; 
or the Life, Tryal, and Examination of J. Nayler, London, 
1656; idem. An Exact Hiat. of the Life of J. Naylor, ib. 
1657; A True A'arrate've of the Examination, Tryall, and 
Sufferinga of J. Nayler, London, 1657; A True Relation 
of the Life, Converaation, Examination, Confeaaion and juat 
Deaerved Sentence of J. Naylor, London, 1657; Memoira of 
the Life, Miniatry, Tryal, and Sufferinga of . . . Jamea 
Nailer, London, 1719; J. G. Sevan, A Refutation of Some 
of the more Modem Miarepreaentationa of the Society of 
Frienda, v:ith a Life of J. Nayler, London, 1800; DNB, 
xl. 130-133. 

COSTAL (Church of the Nazarenb. 




HAZARENES: The name given to two modem 
religiouB sects. For Nasarene as applied to Jesus 
Christ and his disciples see Nazareth. 

1. Adherents of Jacob Wirz, a silk-weaver of 
Basel (b. 1778; d. 1858). This little sect owes its 
origin to the most various spritual elements. Its 
doctrines are based upon medieval Catholic ideas 
and the mystical conceptions of Jakob Bdhme, 
Michael Hahn, and Friedrich Christoph Oetinger 
(qq.v.). Among its beliefs were the following: 
Jesus wished to be thoroughly and perfectly engen- 
dered in Wirz, who was to become by grace what 
Jesus is by nature; Jesus Jehovah, one being with 
the Father and the Holy Ghost, is the basis of man's 
life and action, whom we embrace in connection 
with the holy mother community in heaven, and its 
true members on earth, so that we may together 
grow into a perfect temple of the divine wisdom in 
Chrkit. The following elements are prominent: (1) 
the Catholic element, as expressed in the supplica- 
tions to Mary and the saints, in the practise of 
making the sign of the cross, and in the high esti- 
mation of celibacy; (2) the theosophical element, 
from which source the adherents draw their higher 
wisdom. Regarding the objective facts of salvation 
as well as the subjective process of salvation, the 
cnideness of the conceptions is striking, as, for in- 
stance, in the explanation of the birth, death, and 
resurrection of Christ. If ''the blood of Jesus'' is 
the material for the rebirth of the whole universe 
" then the man who wishes to be blessed must en- 
tirely absorb this human and divine substance by 
faith, which possesses a magnetic power." There- 
fore, justification is imputed only in the beginning; 
it must rise to the grade of a sanctifying and unifying 
justification, which brings with it a transformation 
into the divine being of light. The firm faith in this 
supposedly higher knowledge produced a certain 
self-consciousness which not only turned against 
ecclesiastical Christianity, but also, and more espec- 
ially, assumed an attitude of opposition to theolo- 
gians and set its face against all scientific investiga- 
tion as a falling away from Christ. The vitality and 
growth of this sect is very limited; it exists only in 
a few scattered places, such as Barmen and Elber- 
feld, and in a few districts in the hill-country of 
WOrttembei^, and does not appear to have any 
future. J. Herzog. 

2. Hnngsrinn Anabaptists. They originated 
about 1845 and number at present about 15,000. 
They have an active propaganda, are growing in 
importance, and have reproduced the quieter and 
purer type of Anabaptism of the middle of the six- 
teenth century. Little is known of them because 
they are inactive in the work of publication, and are 
averse to everything not strictly religious. Their 
hymn-book is their only official publication (Zurich, 
5th ed., 1889). There is an excellent article con- 
cerning them by G. Schwalm {JPT, xvi. 484-545, 

The name " Nazarene " has long been officially 
used. Probably the brothers Hemsey, who labored 
about 1840 as artizans in Switzerland and came 
into contact with FrOhlich and his adherents in 
Thurgau or near Strasbuig, brought this type of 
Christianity to their native land. After 1848 a 

large number of Nazarenes were found in Hungary, 
whose most zealous apostle was Stephen Kalm^ 
(d. 1863). They have since spread through southern 
Hungary. They have only one article of faith: the 
Bible gives God's commandments; to keep them con- 
scientiously is " the way " to salvation. They admit 
that in the other churches children of God are found, 
but claim that they should join the Nazarenes. They 
lay stress upon the doing of God's will, and upon suf- 
fering. Complete passivity and patient bearing of in- 
sults and ill-treatment characterize them. They do 
not complain of severe oppression, to which they were 
formerly especially exposed. This is the lot, they 
say, of the children of God. They firmly refuse to 
take an oath and decline military service. It is not 
the bearing of arms in itself to which they object, 
but the purpose of killing the enemy which they 
regard as autichristian. In their religious phrase- 
ology they agree with other pietists and prefer to 
use Biblical language. They are noted for their 
beautiful singing. They kneel at prayer, sometimes 
observing silence. Baptism is of adults and by 
immersion, followed by prayer and imposition of 
hands by the elders. They are sought as laborers 
because of their diligence, sobriety, honesty, and 
thrift, and are not opposed to amassing wealth. 
The persecutions through which they passed often 
produced in them a certain fanaticism, characteris- 
tically Anabaptist, evinced by their hatred of the 
church, of priests, and of the educated ministry. 
To these they apply all words spoken by Jesus 
against the Pharisees and scribes. From their 
pietistic standpoint, every external formality 
of worship appears to belong to the kingdom of 
apostasy. They therefore form no church oi*ganiza- 
tion; they do not even record their baptized mem- 
bers. All who become " converted " and ** have 
the testimony of the congregation " may receive 
immersion. These join thereby not an oi^ganized 
** church " but the " Christ-believing congregation." 
But almost all Nazarenes know each other person- 
ally, however dispersed they may be. Their elders 
enjoy an almost unrestricted influence, they advise 
in all possible concerns, even in matrimonial affairs. 
Their position is not fixed by rule; there is no formal 
control over financial administration and relief; 
everything is a matter of confidence. The Naza- 
renes have personal and epistolary intercourse with 
the Fr5hlichians in Zurich and Strasbuig, with some 
neo-Baptists in WUrttemberg, with Lothringians, and 
with the Amish Mennonites in America, whom they 
call coreligionists. But their relation to the Bap- 
tists, otherwise nearest to them, is by no means 
friendly. The Baptist congregations they put on 
the same basis as the '' church/' Baptists who join 
them they baptize again. Their following is from 
the lower classes. Their future, when their virtues, 
their growing wealth, and their industry procure for 
them greater importance and when their narrow 
vision gives place to needed scientific education, 
can not be foreseen. Political changes in Hungary 
have greatly ameliorated their condition. The 
period 1848-1868 was their time of struggle. Their 
children were forcibly removed and baptized in the 
churches; and they themselves suffered long terms 
of imprisonment for refusing military 8er\'ice. 




Many died in prison, some were even sentenced to 
death in the war of 1866 on account of this refusal. 
Since 1868 the constitution has granted liberty of 
conscience, but this has not always been observed. . 
As late as 1902 many, otherwise blameless, were in 
prison for refusing military service. Even their 
marriage customs brought them into conflict \^ith 
the authorities. With the new Hungarian legisla- 
tion of 1894 and 1895 some relief has come; they are 
no more obliged to belong to any of the acknowl- 
edged confessions. The State recognizes them as 
undenominational citizens when they apply as such, 
and they show respect for the *' authority appointed 
by God." They are not molested because their 
children take no part in the religious instruction of 
the church and disregard obligatory attendance at 
church. In their propaganda they are also unmo- 
lested. They do not believe in universal salvation. 
Hence in their propaganda they aim to save from 
the world only the " susceptible souls." 

S. Cramer. 

Bibuooraprt: On 1 ooxuult: The founder's Biajraphie; 
ein ZeuffniM der Nazarenergemeinde von der Entwicklung 
des Reiehes OoUe« auf Erden, Barmen, 1862; his ZeuonisM 
und Erdffnungen dot GeUtea durch J. J. Wirt htxlxge Urkun- 
den der Nazarenergemeinde, 2 vols., ib. 1863-64; and C. 
von Palmer, Die Oemeintehaften und Sekten WUrtttmbergB, 
pp. 143 sqq.. Tabingon, 1877. 

NAZARETH: The native city of Jesus (Matt, 
xii. 54; Mark vi. 1 ; Luke iv. 23). There his parents 
lived (Matt. ii. 23; Luke i. 26, ii. 4, 39) and his 
brothers and sisters (Mark vi. 3) ; and there he grew 
up (Luke ii. 51, iv. 16). As the name of the place 
does not occur in the Old Testament and is not 
authentically certified in later Jewish literature, its 
Hebrew form can be inferred only from the Greek 
form in the New Testament, Nazareth, Nazaretf or 
Nazara. The meaning of the name is uncertain. 
Jerome thought of nezer, " flower " (Epist, xlvi., Ad 
MarceUam), In the Talmud Jesus is called '^ the 
Nazarene '' and his disciples " Nazarenes ** from a 
Greek form NazarSnos (cf. Mark i. 24, x. 47), though 
another form is NazOraios (Matt. xxvi. 71; Luke 
xviii. 37). In Eusebius' Onomasticon the form is 
interpreted either as " holy, pure," or it is brought 
into connection with the Hebrew for " twig, flower," 
ut sup. Hitzig proposed to derive the word from 
the Hebr. nzyry in the impointed text of Isa. xlix. 6 
and to interpret the plural Acts xxiv. 6, ** saved 
ones," in contrast with the " perishing " of I Cor. 
i. 18, 21; II Cor. ii. 15. At a later time, according 
to Hitzig, the same word, as singular, was referred 
to Jesus himself, in the sense of " saved one " as 
well as in allusion to Nazareth (Matt. ii. 23). 

Little is known of the early history of Nazareth. 
It was situated in Galilee (Matt. xxi. 11; Mark i. 9), 
on the slope of a hill (Luke iv. 29), and had a syna- 
gogue in which Jesus taught, though without suc- 
cess (Matt. xiii. 53-58; Mark vi. 1-6). According to 
Epiphanius (Hcdr. i. 136) the town had only Jewish 
inhabitants until the time of Constantine, and even 
then only a few Christians settled there. Nazareth 
was evidently only at a comparatively late period 
received into the number of holy places of pilgrim- 
age. Hence the authenticity of the holy places 
now revered in Nazareth is doubtful. Under the 
dominion of the crusaders Nazareth was apparently 

a purely Christian place, the seat of a bishop, later 
of an archbishop. It suffered severely from the 
victories of Saladin 1187 and of Sultan Bibars 1263, 
also from the Turkish conquest in 1517. It flour- 
ished for a time under the dominion of Fa^r el- 
Din, prince of the Druses (1620-1634), but soon 
declined owing to discords among the inhabitants 
and attacks from outside. 

Nazareth rests concealed in a hollow surrounded 
by hills as if in the cavity of a shell. The slopes are 
well cultivated toward the south and east, corn- 
fields alternating with vineyards and fig-trees. The 
present population is estimated at 11,000, of whom 
the orthodox Greeks and Mohammedans form each 
a third, while the Latins number 1,500, the United 
Greeks 1,000, the Protestants 250, the Maronltes 
200; Jews are not tolerated there. Nazareth is 
the capital of a district and an important market 
tovm. Of the holy places in Nazareth the orthodox 
Greek Church of St. Gabriel or the Church of the 
Annunciation is especially attractive, being built 
beside the spring of St. Mary in the northeast of the 
town. It was mentioned as early as 670, but the 
present structure was erected in 1780. The Roman 
Catholic church was built in 1730. Nazareth is 
now the seat of an orthodox Greek bishop and has 
a Greek monastery with a school for boys and girls; 
the Russians support several schools there. The 
Roman Catholic Church is represented by the Fran- 
ciscans and by several orders of women. The Mar- 
onites also have a church. In 1851 the English 
Church Mission founded a Protestant congregation, 
and the Female Education Society in London 
erected in 1872-75 a stately orphans' home for girls. 

Biruographt: An excellent treatment is to be found in 
F. Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, faac. xzviii. 1521- 
1542, Paris. 1906. Consult further: Hitsi«, in TlOnnger 
theohgieche ZeiUehrift, i (1842). 410-413; T. Tobler, 
Natareth in Pal<B9Hna, Berlin. 1868; V. Gu6rin, Deserip' 
Hon de la Palestine, iii.. Galilee, i. 83-102. Paris. 1880; 
Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs, i. 275-279. Lon- 
don, 1881; W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, 
Central Palestine, pp. 310-322. New York. 1882; Q. Eben 
and H. Quthe, PalOstina in Bild und Wori, i. 302 sqq., 
Stutticart. 1883; O. Schumacher, in ZDPV, xiii (1890>, 
235 sqq.; G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy 
Jxmd, pp. 432-435. London. 1894; F. Buhl, Geographie 
des alien PalHstina, pp. 215 sqq.. TObinsen. 1896; Robin- 
son, Researches, iii. 183 sqq.; DB, iii. 496-497; EB, iii. 
3358-62; JE, ix. 195; DCG, ii. 235-237. The recent 
monograph is G. Le Hardy. HUi. de Natareth et de ses 
sanctiiaires, Paris, 1905. The subject is treated also in 
many of the works on the life of Jesus Christ. 

NAZIRITES: The name given to Hebrews who 
assumed certain vows or upon whom these vows 
were imposed by their parents. The naziritic in- 
stitution (Hebr. nazir, " separate/' Gk. naziraios, 
nazaraioa) included both sexes, involved abstinence 
from intoxicating drinks, avoidance of contact with 
the dead, and the imchecked growth of the hair. 
It was a distinctly religious institution, and the 
resolution to assume the obligations which it imposed 
was regarded slp inspired by Yahweh (Amos ii. 11), 
to whom the nazirite was consecrated (Num. vi. 2). 
This consecration might be for a lifetime (Samson, 
Samuel, John the Baptist), or for a shorter period, 
and it might be assumed by the parents for a child 
even before his birth. The law of the nazirite is 
given Lev. vi. 1-21 . In the required abstinence from 


wine there isdiaeemed the survival of a prahistoric 
puritanic eonception of the Semites which held the 
CDJoyment oC wine and like luxuries to be hindrances 
in the way of perfect sen-ice of the deity. The 
abstineoceti of the Rechabites (Jer. xxxv.), of the 
Nabateans (Diodorus Siculua, xix. 04), and of Mo- 
bainmedaiia are examples of the aun-ival of thia 
conception. In the case of the naiirite there is a 
coDoectioD with the priesthood found in the prohi- 
bition of contact wth the dead, even of participation 
in the mourning ceremoniea far hia own kin, showing 
the sanctity of the naiirite; this is illustrated by ihe 
fact that the Talmudic tract Naiir (vii. I ) places the 
Qaurite and the high priest on the aame footing. 
But the naziritic vow did not necessarily involve 
special service at the sanctuary. The prohibition 
to cut the hair arises from the fact that the hair is 
sacred to Yahweh. Many peoples regarded the 
growth of the hair as a divine energy which wasnot 
to be asaailed or weakened by contact with a tool 
of man's workmanship; the full growth of hair ex- 
hibited by a nazirite was, therefore, a sign of con- 
secration, and with Samson was a condition of hia 
divine power. lUuatrative of this is the fact that 
the term naiir was applied to the uDtrimmcd vine of 
the Sabbatical and Jubilee years. If during the 
period of his consecration the naiirite incurred 
pollution, his hair uus shorn, the term of consecra- 
tion was begun anew, and certain expiatory offerings 
were made (Num. ri. 9 aqq.). The Talmudic tract 
Temurah (vi. 4) prescribes that the hair of the pol- 
luted naiirile be not burned but buried; the impli- 
cation is therefore that when the hair was burned 
in the sanctuoty, the ceremony nas constructively 
» sacrifice, and this is illustraled by ethnic usage 
like that of Mohammedan pilgrims who leave their 
hair unshorn from the time of taking the vow of 
pQf;Timage until they reach Mecca and then cut the 
hair and bum it on holy ground. In the case of the 
naitrite who assumed the vows for a period only 
and not for life, the end of the term was marked by 
■everal kinds of sacrifices — biunt offering, sin-offer- 
ing, peace-offering, with their accessories (Num. vi. 
13 eqq.). Not to be overlooked is the difference in 
spirit between this institution and similar observ- 
ances among Hindus and even Christians; in the 
latter case the object is suppression of sensual Incli- 
nations, in the Hebrew institution the purpose was 
to cooflerve the full vigor of the body for the service 
of God. 

Poetexilic Judaism employed the naziritio vow 
in case of illness or misfortune (Josephus, War, II,, 
XV.), when undertaking s journey (Nanr, i. 6), and 
on like occaaJons; it even furnished a form of oath 
which gave rise to Pharisaic casuistry and brought 
nuiritiam into disrepute. Paul seems to have a 
casual rel&tionship to naziritism in the incident 
mentioned Acts iviii. 18, though there is doubt 
whether the vow wferred to Paul or Aquila, and 
indeed whether the vow was actually nazirilic. 
On the other hand, Paul assumed the not inconsid- 
erable expenses attending the completion of the 
rows of four indigent Jews (Acts xxi. 23 sqq.). 
"Hae was a friendly servnce often rendered by the 
mlthy (cf. Josepbus, Ant, XIX., vi. 1; Mishna, 
ifocfr, ii.6). C. VON Obblli. 

Bibijookapht: Comult: the nimmeDtiiriH on ths pBssagn 
cited: H. Vilmar, in TSK. luvu (18041. 43S Hiq.; H. 
Ewald, AiUwuil^ et /miff, pp. 8*-S8. Br«t™, 1876; 
J. Grill, in JPT, vi (ISSO), 64S iqq.; J, B. Gray, in /oui- 
niiio/r*«p(0!ricoJS(udi>.. i(1900>, minqq.; C. OrHneiscn, 
Drr Ahnencuilia. pp. 4fl, 71, »2. 113 >qq., Halle, 1900; 
BeniiaEer. Arthaatoeie, pp. 361-30:2: Nowack. Arcli/tt^aeu, 
a. 134-138; Vigouroui. DirlionKaire, xiviiL 1615-20; 
DB. iii. 437-501; EB. iii. 3362-64: DCO. ii. 237-238: 
JE, ii. ISG-ig3. 

HEAL, DAIflEL: Historian of the Puritans; 
b. in London Dec. 14, 1678; d. at Bath Apr. 4, 1743. 
He studied first at Merchant Taylora' School, Lon- 
don, then (16IM-9!)) in Rev. Thomas Rowe's acad- 
emy in Little Britain, and then for three years at 
I'trecht and Ley den. Returning to London in 
1703, the next year he was chosen assistant pastor, 
and in 1706 full pastor, of the Independent Congre- 
gation in Alderagate Street, and faithfully served 
it, until, a few months prior to his death, he was 
compelled by ill-health to resign. He was the author 
of two works which have given him lasting fame : Th« 
History of New England, ConUixning an Impartial 
AamiTil of the Cit-U and Eeclegiattical Affairs qf the 
Cmintryto the Year of Our Lord 1700 (2 vols., London, 
1720) and the standard Hisl-ory of the PuribiTu, or 
Protettant Non-eonformUls, fromOie RtformalUm in 
!5I7, to the Revolution in 1688 (4 vols., 1732-38; 
2d. ed., 2 vols,, 1754; ed. J. Toulmin, with Life, 
5 vols., Bath, 1~'J3-<J7; ed. J. O. Choules, 2 vols.. 
New York, 1844). 

Biblioorapht: BeaiiiM the' by Tniilinin. ut «up., oon- 
■ult: Walter Wiban, HiH. and .Infiqin/iri cf DunrnHno 
Churclui in /-indon, iii. W)-10a, London. ISIO; DNB. xl. 


BEALE, JOHH MASOH: Ecclesiastical his- 
torian and hymnoiogist; b. at London Jan. 24, 1818; 
d. at East Grinstead (23 m. a. of London) Aug. 6, 
1866. He was educated at Trinity College, Cam- 
bridge (A.B., 1840). While a atudent he developed 
an extraordinary interest in church archeology, es- 
pieeiidly in architecture, and with a few others or- 
ganised in 1839 the Cambridge Camden Society, 
which lasted till 1845. He was ordained deacon in 
1841, and priest in 1842; was for a few months of 
1842 incumbent of Crawley in Suasei, but ill-health 
compelled him to resign. He then married and the 
next winter went to live in Madeira. There he found 
faciUties and strength to continue his literary work, 
which had already brought him considerable repu- 
tation. He returned to England finally in 1845, 
and from 1846 till hia death wan warden of Sackvitle 
College, East Grinstead. The " college " really was 
an almshouse for a few old people of both sexes, 
and the salary was only some £24 a yearl But the 
duties were light and congenial and hia opportuni- 
ties for remunerative Uterary work were unimpaired. 
Still the position meant thai in all likelihood he was 
out of the line of preferment. 

He belonged to the most advanced section of 
High-churehmen : and his outspoken and consistent 
championship of Puseyism (see Pi'sey, Edwaho 
Boovehje) won him not only suspicion, but obloquy. 
He was under the inhibition of his bishop (Chiches- 
ter) from 164C to 1863; but his zeal and industry 
matched his great and varied talents. " Hia life 
was divided," says Joeiah Miller, "between ex- 
cessive literary lent and exhausting labors of piety 




and benevolence/' He founded, in 1856, the Sis- 
terhood of St. Margaret. Desperately unpopular 
for a time, the order was before his death in de- 
mand everywhere, as furnishing the best nurses 
in England. 

As an author his productiveness has few parallels, 
and he was more appreciated for his writings abroad 
than at home. His most important writings are 
his History of the Holy Eastern Church with The 
Patriarchate of Alexandria and The Patriarchate of 
Antioch in the appendix (5 vols., London, 1850-73); 
and Commentary on the Psalms from Primitive and 
Medicsval Writers (4 vols., 1874; in association with 
R. F. Littledale). Mention may be made also of 
Hierologus, or the Church Tourists (1843); Ecclesio- 
logical Notes on the Isle of Man (1848) ; Readings for 
the Aged (4 series, 1850-58); HisUrry of the So-Called 
Jansenist Church of Holland (1858); Voices from the 
East(lS59); smd Sermons for Children {IS67). Yet 
almost everything which he wrote provoked con- 
troversy. He had strong convictions, and the full 
courage of them: in his o^^ view he was a witness 
of a system of absolute truth. On almost every 
page of his writings, whether prose or verse, learned 
or popular, his point of view and his resolute purpose 
are apparent: they are books of faith and of inten- 
tion. To him '* religion was thesolidest of all reali- 
ties," and religion and the Church were inseparably 
one. Nowhere is this more marked than in his won- 
derful stories for children and young people. Most 
of these have a historical foundation; many of 
them recite real or supposed facts, dealing with 
ancient or obscure trials and martyrdoms. His 
sympathies seem rather Roman than Protestant, 
and dubious legends are accepted with imquestion- 
ing belief; but the charm of style, the minute knowl- 
edge of distant times and places, the vivid realiza- 
tion, the subdued feeling, at once profoundly devout 
and intensely human, form a combination which 
few English popularizers of Christian history have 
approached. The Farm of Apionga (1856); The 
Egyptian Wanderers (1854); The Followers of the 
Lord (1851); Lent Legends (1855); Tales of Chris- 
tian Heroism and Endurance (in the Juvenile Eng- 
lishman's Library, vi., 1846), and some others, are 
as much prized by adult as by juvenile readers. 

As a poet, Neale eleven times gained the Sea- 
tonian prize. An edition of his Seatonian Poems 
(Cambridge, 1864) was dedicated, by permission, 
to his bishop, after their reconciliation. His Songs 
and Ballads for the People (London, 1843) and Songs 
and BcUlads for Manufacturers (1850) are secular 
only in name. But his greatest services have been 
rendered, and his widest fame won, through his 
hymns. Here he worked in a field entirely con- 
genial. His twenty Hymns for the Sick (1843), and 
eighty-six Hymns for Children (1843) include some 
gems and much useful matter. The Hymnal Noted 
(1851-54) is chiefly given to long metres, which 
seem somewhat dry and formal. MedicBval Hymns 
and Sequences (1851; 2d ed., enlarged, 1863) afford 
more variety and many valuable notes. Among the 
most precious of these is Neale's first selection from 
the famous Rhythm of Bernard de Morlaix, com- 
pleted in 1858, beginning with the line, " Jerusalem, 
the golden." After the Rhythm of Bernard his 

noblest work is Hymns of the Eastern Church (1862). 
There he was on ground familiar to him, and to him 
alone, and the mine he opened yielded treasures in- 
deed. Almost unknown to the English Church were 
original sacred lyrics of such beauty as " Art thou 
weary," " The Day is past and over," and " Safe 
home." Within twenty years, many of these Greek 
hymns have made their way almost eveiywhere. 

Neale was a singular compound of medieval (he 
would have called it primitive) doctrine and devo- 
tion ¥dth modem culture and English manliness. 
He was the sworn foe of breadth or liberalism; but 
his laige gifts and natiuie transcended his self-im- 
posed (or, as he thought, God-imposed) limits, and 
made much of his work catholic in the sense which 
he repudiated. Those who most disliked his Roman- 
izing tendencies have been forced to admire his 
vast industry, his rigid consistency, his patience 
under long adversity, injustice, and neglect, his 
superiority to all questions of self-interest, and his 
heroic and imflinching faith. 

Bibuoorapht: LeUer$ of John Mamm NeaU, S^ieeted and 
ed, by hit Dauohtert London and New York, 1910; EHeaaaor 
A. Towle, John Mamm NeaUt A Memoir, London, 1900; 
W. Jowett, Memoir of the Rev. Comdius Neale (hk father), 
ib. 1834; G. Huntington. Random RecoUectione, pp. 198- 
223, ib. 1893; S. W. Duffield, Engliah Hymne, pp. 271- 
273 et passim, New York, 1886; S. M. Jackson, Sourcee of 
" Jerusalem the Oolden** passim, Ctuoago. 1910; Julian, 
Hymnolooy* pp. 785-790; DNB, xl. 143-140. 

NEANDER, JOACHIM: Principal poet of the 
Reformed Church; b. at Bremen 1650; d. there 
May 31, 1680. He was educated at the Latin 
school of Bremen and in 1666 entered the Gymna- 
sium illustre. After a carelessly spent youth he 
was converted by a sermon of Theodor Undereick, 
pastor of St. Martini in Bremen, by whom he was 
led into the path of Reformed pietism. As the tutor 
of the sons of distinguished Frankfort merchants, 
and also to continue his studies, Neander went to 
Heidelberg. In 1674 the Reformed congregation 
of DOsseldorf called him as rector to their Latin 
school, but private religious meetings instituted by 
him in 1676 and some arbitrary rules in the admin- 
istration of the school, brought him into conflict 
with the preacher and consistoiy. He was deposed 
in 1677, but before the notification reached him he 
signed a declaration in which among other things he 
condemned separation from the external church 
conmiunity as practised by Labadie and his people. 
He also renounced secret meetings and the " deten- 
tion of members from the Lord's Supper." Neander 
was in consequence merely suspended. In 1679 he 
was called to Bremen as third preacher of the church 
of St. Martin, but died in the following year. The 
first edition of his songs appeared under the title, 
A & Q Joachimi Neandri Glaub- und LUbes-Uebung: 
Auffgemuntert durch einfdUige Bundes Lieder und 
Danck-Psalmen . . . (Bremen, 1680), contained 
fifty-seven songs, of which about twenty editions 
appeared before 1730. Although not suitable for 
church hymns because of their marked subjectivity, 
and though they contained reminiscences of Laba- 
die and oJF Cocceius, the songs were taken into the 
hymnals. In the second part of the hymn-book for 
Cleve, Julich, Berg, and Mark of 1738, Neander's 
name stands beside that of Luther on the title page. 




While some of Neander's productioiiB are awkward 
and lack polish, otherB are bo powerful and impress- 
ive, 80 devout and edncere, and so highly imagina- 
tive that they secured an honorable place among 
spiritual songs. Neander proved himself also a true 
musician, for of the melodies to his hymns nineteen 
originated with him. (E. Simons.) 

BnuoosAFHT: J. H. Reiti, HutorU der Wiedergeborenerit 
ir. 44^7. Itaiteia. 1717; M. 06bel. OeachiehU de» cArtat- 
Kehen Ltbeiu in der rheiniweh-wealflUitehen Kirche, ii. 322- 
358. Goblens, 1849; C. Winkworth, The ChriaUan HinQtrB 
of Oenmany, London, 1869; W. Nelle, Joachim Neander, 
der Dicier der Bundealieder und Dankpealmen, Hamburg, 
1903: Julian. Hymnology, pp. 790-792; ADB, vol. xziii. 


Gareer (| 1). Conception ot Chunsh His- 

Works (I 2). tory and Methods (| 4). 

Plaee In Chureh History Defect as a Historian (| 6). 
(I 3). Personal Cbaraeteristics (| 6). 

Johann August Wilhelm Neander was bom at 
GdtUngen Jan. 17, 1789; d. at Berlin July 14, 1850. 
He was of Hebrew descent, bearing the name of 
David Mendel before his conversion to Christianity; 
and through his mother he was related to the phi- 
losopher Mendelssohn. Soon after his 
I. Career, birth he was taken by his mother, 
who had been separated from her hus- 
band, to Hamburg, which in subsequent years he 
r^aided as his home. He was educated by the 
help of friends, especially the councilor Stieglits. 
At the gymnasium at Hamburg he was especially 
interested in the study of Plato, which prepared 
him for the acceptance of Christianity. But that 
which determined him most strongly in its favor 
was Schleiermacher's Reden Hber die Religion, On 
Feb. 15, 1806, David Mendel was baptized, in the 
Church of St. Catharine at Hamburg, under the 
name of Neander (New-man). The state of his 
mind was pictured in an essay he wrote before his 
b^tism, which was an attempt to describe the 
various stages of religious development; and it was 
apparent that he regarded Christianity from an ideal 
standpoint, rather than as the absolute truth. Un- 
til the spring of 1806 he had been intending to study 
law, and left Hamburg with this in view. He went 
to the University of Halle, where he came especially 
under the influence of Schleiermacher (q.v.); but 
he was compelled, by the commotions of war, to 
exchange for Gdttingen, where Gottlieb Jacob 
Planck (q.v.) was then teaching. On his return to 
the universi^ from a visit to Hamburg, in the fall 
of 1807, he substituted for Schleiermacher, Fried- 
rich Schelling and Johann Fichte (qq.v.) the New 
Testament and the Church Fathers. A few months 
afterward, he laid a confession before his friends, 
binding himself to the study of church history, and 
praying the Lord to preserve him from errors. In 
the spring of 1809 he returned to Hamburg, where 
he taught for eighteen months, preached from time 
to time, and continued with great zeal the study of 
church history. In 181 1 he habilitated at Heidelberg 
with the dissertation, De fidei gnoaeosque Christiana 
idea et ea, qua ad se invicem atque ad philoaophiam 
re/eraniur, ratiane accundum mentem Clementis Alex- 
andrini. In 1812 he was made professor extraordi- 
nary at the university, and the same year issued the 
first of his monographs, Ueber den Kaiser Jvlianus 

und sein ZeikUter (Hamburg, 1812; Eng. transl., 
Julian the AposiaU, New York, 1850). In 1813 he 
was called to Berlin to labor at the side of Schleier- 
macher, Wilhelm De Wette, and Philip Marheineke 
(qq.v.) where he lectured on church history and the 
exegesis of the New Testament with great success 
and continued his literary labors. 

Neander published: Der ?ieilige Bemhard und aein 
Zeilalter (Berlin, 1813); Die genetische Entwickelung 
der vamehmsten gnostischen Systeme (1818); Der 
heilige Johann Chrysostamus und die Kirche besandera 
des Orients in dessen Zeilalter (1821-22) ; 
2. Works. DenkwOrdigkeiten aus der Oeschichte des 
Christenthums und des christliehen 
Lebens (1822-24); and Antignasticus, Oeist des Ter- 
tuUianus und Einleilung in dessen Sckriften (1826). 
All these monographs were a preparation for the 
main work of his life, Allgemeine Oeschichte der 
christliehen Rdigion und Kirche (6 vols, in 11, Ham- 
burg, 1825-52; 4th ed., Gotha, 1863-65; Eng. 
transl., J. Torrey, Oeneral History of the Christian 
Religion and Church, 5 vols., and Index [by Mary 
Cutler Torreyl new ed., New York, 1882). This 
work comes down to the mart3rrdom of Jerome of 
Prag. Die Oeschichte der Pflansung und Leitung der 
christliehen Kirche durch die Apostd (1832; Eug. 
transl., J. E. Ryland, History of the Planting and 
Training of the Christian Church by the Apostles, 
Edinburgh, 1842; revised by E. G. Robinson, New 
York, 1865) is an independent introduction to the 
histoiy. The controversy evoked by the Life of 
Jesus Christ by Strauss led him to write Das L^ben 
Jesu Christi in seinem geschichtlichen Zusammen- 
hang (1837; 7th ed., Gotha, 1873; Eng. transl., J. 
McCHintock and C. E. Blumenthal, The lAfe of Jesus 
Christ, New York, 1848), pronounced the best an- 
swer offered to Strauss' work. He also wrote com- 
mentaries on Philippians (Berlin, 1849; Eng. transl., 
New York, 1851), James (1850; Eng. transl., 
1859), and I John (1851; Eng. transl., 1852). Other 
activities were his lectures on systematic theology 
and, after Schleiermacher's death, on ethics which 
appeared after his death in Dogmengeschichte (Ber- 
lin, 1857), KatholvBismus und Protestantismus (1863), 
and OeschichU der christliehen Ethik (1864). 

In order to appreciate the position of Neander as 
a church historian it is necessary to take into con- 
sideration the views which had, up to this time, pre- 
vailed among church historians. The most im- 
portant church historian of that time 
3. Place in was Planck, and he belonged to the 
Church so-called pragmatic school. It must 
History, not be forgotten, however, that higher 
conceptions of church history had be- 
gun to be expressed by Schelling, Marheineke, and 
Johann Gieseler (q.v.). The pragmatic school only 
looked at C]!hristianity as a system of doctrine and not 
as a historical development. In its interest in indi- 
viduals and their thinking and plans as the only 
causes of changes, it lost sight of objective forces. 
Of higher causes it knew nothing. It substituted 
for the fulness of a living development, its poor 
shallow conception of Christianity. Instead of 
dealing n^ith events or a revelation of the fulness 
of Christ's life, church history was turned into a 
picture gallery representing human follies and errors, 




which the historians felt free to condemn or to 

Neander broke through the rules of the prag- 
matic school in his very first work, Julian, at the 
beginning of which he aflirms eternal Providence 
to be the molding spirit of histoiy rather than hu- 
man creation. He substituted for psychological 
arts the rich results of a study of the historical 
sources. The general principle of Neander's method 
is seen to even better advantage in his monograph 
on Bemhard. Author and subject were kindred 
spirits; and, in the treatment of Bemhard 's career, 
Neander lays bare the innermost principle of his 
life, and derives his activity from it. In hia Chrya- 
oatom, the most elaborate of his biographies, 
Neander displays the same method. 

Neander's conception of church history is set 

forth in the Introduction to his great work in these 

words: ** We look upon Christianity, not as a system 

bom in the hidden depths of man's nature, but as 

a power which has come down from 

4. Concep- heaven, in that heaven has opened it- 

tion of self to a hostile world — a power which 

Church in its essence, as well as in its origin, 

Histoiy is exalted high above all that man can 
and create with his own powers, and which 

Methods, was designed to impart to him new 
life, and transform him in his inner- 
most nature." He regards Christianity as also a 
force, a life, and not alone as a dogma, or a divine 
power which has come down from heaven. In his 
view, therefore, the history of the church is the his- 
tory of the process of the interpenetration of man's 
life with the divine life; or the history of the divine 
life of Christ pervading humanity. This new life 
was perfectly manifested in Christ, the second Adam, 
and becomes concrete in the lives of individuals 
whose peculiarities are not destroyed, but trans- 
formed and glorified. Every Christian, therefore, 
repeats the life of Christ in his own characteristic 
way. In no one is that life repeated in its compre- 
hensive fulness. Each only presents a single aspect 
of it. Neander is constantly representing the one 
life of Christ in its conflict with sin, and in its adop- 
tion and rejection of worldly principles and forces 
in the various phases of rationalism and supemat- 
uralism, scholasticism, and mysticism, and in specu- 
lative and practical effort. To this general con- 
ception is due the edificatory character of Nean- 
der's History. One of Neander's characteristics as 
a historian is his talent for portraying individual 
traits of character and life. He honored the indi- 
vidual as no other historian before him, and brought 
out the objective features of his subject, without 
intruding his own subjective thoughts and opinions. 
Closely connected with this talent is his ability, 
which has already been referred to, of understand- 
ing and sympathizing with the experiences of 
others, and unveiling the Christian element in 
their lives. 

The objectivity of Neander's portrayal of events 
and persons is the most important feature of his 
work; but also its weakest point, for the concrete 
and individual are relatively far more prominent 
than the universal. Neander's defect was failure 
to appreciate the Church and allow it due promi- 

nence. Instead of the Church there is a collection 
of single portraits of individuals animated with the 
life of Christ. The biographical element predomi- 
nates. Neander loves to dwell upon 

5. Defect the spiritual life of his characters, and 
as a has depicted with a master's hand the 

Historian, hidden life of the Church; but in doing 
so he has neglected to portray its all- 
conquering power over the world. The influence of 
the Church upon the formation of dogmatic beliefs, 
upon civil law, social customs, art, and architecture, 
he does not sufficiently bring' out. In spite of the 
variety of individual character and experience, the 
history of the Church in his hands does not present 
a harmonious and progressive development. Nean- 
der has given a commentary of the parable of the 
leaven, but fails to render justice to the parable of 
the mustard-seed. 

Neander's division of church history is extremely 
simple. So far as the spiritual life of the Church 
is concerned, it falls into three periods. The bound- 
ary between the first and the second is the growth of 
a priesthood — a fact to which he can not call atten- 
tion too often; for his history is a history of the 
universal priesthood. The first period is a period 
of pure spiritual religion; the second is character- 
ized by a rcinswathement of Christianity in habil- 
iments like those of the Old Testament; the third is 
marked by a reaction and an effort of Christian 
liberty to reassert itself. 

Neander's personal influence in the classroom 
was little less important than his literary activity. 
He labored in Berlin for thirty-eight years. In 
his exegetical lectures and commentaries he pur- 
sued a practical method. 

His personal influence upon his students was 
also very great. He presents the figure of a man 
of simple and childlike spirit, helpless 
6. Personal in the practical affairs of life, faithful 
Character- to his calling, severe toward himself, 
istics. and temperate, full of love and gentle- 
ness toward others, and wholly and 
unreservedly devoted to the Lord. But he could 
be severe; he entered a protest against the Evan- 
gelische Kirchenzeitung, and opposed, not only with 
great firmness, but often with heat, both panthe- 
istic and spiritualistic speculations, and the more 
rigid wing in the Church which insisted upon a strict 
system of doctrine. Among those who contributed 
to the revival of faith and theology in the first half 
of this centuiy he has, beyond dispute, one of the 
most prominent places, perhaps the most prominent 
if practical results be considered. 

Throughout the whole of his life he had to con- 
tend against a feeble constitution. In 1847 he 
began to suffer with his eyesight, and was prevented 
from continuing his " History." Attacked with a 
stroke of apoplexy, he lingere<i only a few days 
before he passed away. 

Bzbuooraphy: O. Krabbe, Augtut Neander, HambuiK, 
1852; P. Schaff, Germany; its Unipertitt^s, Theology, and 
Religion, chap, xxv., Philadelphia, 18.57; idem. Saint 
AxiQuiftin, Melanchihon, Neander, New York, 1886; J. L. 
Jacobi, Erinnerungen an AuguH Neander, Halle. 1882; 
It. Schulze, Avoust Neander, Leipsic, 1890; A. Wigand, 
Augiutt Neanders Leben, Erfurt. 1890; K. T. Schneider, 
August Neander, Schleawig, 1895. 


HEBO: The deity of the Babylonian city of 
Bon^ppa, meiitioued in Isa. xlvi. 1 toj^ther wilh 
Bel (Marduk-Merodacb), tiic patroD god of Babylon. 
Hu name is cogitate with the Hebrew nabhi, 
" propbet." Previous to the rei^ of Hammurabi 
(c 2200 B.C.; aee ILuiMiTfuiii and his Code), Neho 
nf Bordppa seems to have been more prominent 
than Harduk of Babylon. Primurily he determined 
destiny at the Babylonian new-year festival, and 
whea Babylon became the metropolis Nebo was 
made a scribe in the chamber of fate, being at the 
■une time regarded as the son of Harduk, In tjie 
prehistoric period, however, Nebo was superior to 
llantuk, for in the accounts of the wars with the 
flnmiles, dating (though presen-ed only in Neo- 
Babylonian recensions) from the time of Hammu- 
nbi, Nebo is " the guardian of the world," and the 
uchaiatic inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian king- 
dom mention Nebo before Harduk. Nebo is pre- 
eminently " the scribe," writing on his tjiblcts the 
fBt« of mankind; since writing was essentially in 
tbe bands of the priests, Nebo was the patron deity 
of the priesthood. The planet Mercury was sacred 
to him, and the extension of his cult to Arabia is 
Aown by an inscription found on the island of 
Bahrein, dating from the early Babylonian period 
(rf. F, Hommel, AufaaUe tind AbhamUungm, pp. 
ISO, 156, Muoich, 1900). Further evidence of the 
latter fact is afforded by tbe name of (he Arab tribe 
Nabayoth (see Nabat£jU<b) and by the god Aii- 
Sai in South Arabia. The Mandsan list of planets 
mentions NTiu, "learned in writing and wise," 
while in the anti-Christian polemics of thcMandsons 
Enbu, or Nebo-Mercury, is the false Messiah, Jesus. 
As the planet Mercury Nebo was likewise a chthonic 
deity; the procreation and life of new-bom children 
were under his protection. Tlie Greeks identifieil 
him with Hermes or Apollo as a god of oracles and 

-_ .1 of Nebo in Isaiah alreiidy 

noted, 6e is implied by " the man clothed in linen, 
which had the inkhom by his side " of EBekicI 
(ix. 2 aqq.) ; and he appears as the archangel of the 
Bocde of Enoch who " wnteth all the works of the 
Lord." The name Nebo was borne by the moun- 
tain whence Moses beheld the future fori-une of 
Ivaei (Deut xxrii. 49 sqq., xxxiv. 1 sqq.), and the 
cities of Nebo and Nob show that a knowledge of 
Nebo had early penetrated nest of the Jordan, 
The following; iheophoric names of the Old Testa- 
ment have Nebo as a component: Nebuchadnezzar 
("Nebo, protect my boundaries"), Nebuiar-adan 
['■ Nebo hath given po?terity "), Nebushasban 
(" Nebo, save me "), and .\bednego (for Abednebo, 
" servant of Nebo "}. Nebo is likewise frequent 
in names on poet -Christian Aramean and Palmy- 
rene inscriptions, as Nabii-duri (" Nebo my fort- 
rpse "), Nabu-sar-iddin (" Nebo hath ei\'en the 
king "), Nabu-sar-ujur ("Nebo, protect the king "), 
and 'Abad-nabu ("servant of Nebo"). See Bab- 
j-lonia. Vn,, 2, J II. (Alfred Jbbemias.) 

BieuonaAPHt; A. .lemniiw, in W. H. Rowhnr. /rfrrton rfir 
^ivchuchm und T'-miKchen Mvthotagir, iii. 45-A6. Lcipnie, 
1808; Sihrackr, KAT. pp. 39(H0S; F. Vieouroui, Dir- 
fimtoirc dr la Biblr, iivu., tdIs. U34-3S: EB. Hi. 3.166- 
33M; and psniirularty the irorks ea Itw nlickm uained 
UDikr Austria: Babtloma. 
VIII.— 7 

KEBDCHADNEZZAR, neb"yu-cod-nez'iQr; The 
Biblical fonn of the name of two Babylonian 
kings (see B.vbylonia, VI., 6, S 1, 7, S 2.) The 
Babylonian form (Nabu-kyditrri-vitur, " Nebo, pro- 
tect my boundary ") suggests the form Nebuchad- 
rezzar, which most scholars now prefer. It is used 
mostly by Jeremiah and always by Ezekiel. 

HECHO, n!'c6 : King of Egj-pt G09-593(?). 
He was a son of Psamlik I., the founder of the 
twenty-sixth dynasty, whose ambitious designs he 
attempted to carry out. He took advantage of 
the decay of Assyrian power (see Absvbia, VI. 3, 
5 1 5) to recover Syria Cor Egypt, on the way defeats 
ing Josiah (q.v.) at Megiddo, 6(JS b.c. On his return 
from the Euphrates he dethroned Jehoahaz (q.v.) 
as king of Judah and set up Jehoiakim (q.v.) in his 
place. But he was defeated in turn by Nebuchad- 
rezzar at Carchemish, 605 B.C. (see Babylonia ,VI., 
7, 5 2>, and in 597 B.C. the Egyptians were again 
eomplcfcly driven out of Asia (see Eotpt, I., 4, i 4). 
BinuooniPHr: The liMmture under Ekvpt, p^rticulHrly 

Iha works of Pclrie nml BivMt«i. Coneull BBpodiflUy Ih« 

btler'i HiMorii a/ Uu AnciaU £'pv7ilung, pp. 404-407. 

New York. 1808. 

Auguatiniaii monk and Latin poet, foster brother 
of Richard I. of England; b. at St. Albans Sept. 8, 
1157; d. at Kempsey (3 m. s. of Worcester), Worces- 
shirc, 1217. He was educated at St. Albans; 
became master of tlie Dunstable school, a dapend- 
cncy of the abbey of St. Albans; went to the 
I'niversity of Paris for study and by 1180 was a 
famous teacher there; in 1213 be became abbot at 
Cirencester, Gloucestershire. He was a man of 
nide learning, one of the best Latin poets of his age, 
and wrote among many other things two curious 
productions, De naiuria rerum (of no scientiRo value, 
but interesting for the information it conveys), and 
De laudib-ua divina: aapienHa: (both cd. T. Wright, 
ill RoUb Series, No. 34, 18fl3); also De i-tto Jtumach- 
orum (ed. T. Wright, ib., No. 59, ii. 175-200, 1872). 
He wrote also on grammar and lexicography, com- 
mentaries on parts of Scripture, on Aristotle, and 
on Ovid. 
BiBtJOnBAI-lit : BcKJdcs the pnlace to Wright's ed. of the 

Dr rmturit. ut aup.. eoDBulC: T. Wright. Bioortiphia Briian- 

NECTARIUS: Patriarch of Constantinople; b. 
in the first half of the fourth century; d. at Constan- 
tinople Sept. 27, 397. He was elected to the patri, 
archate by the council held at Constantinople in 
381, but the precise reason for his selection ia doubt- 
ful. According to Socrates {.HUt. tal.. V., viii. 12), 
Nectarius was of senatorial rank and a pnetor, a 
layman, and the candidate of the people. Sozomen 
{Hint, ewi., VIL, viii.) atat«s that he was a native 
of Tarsus, and also gives a number of less credible 
details, such as that Nectarius was still an unbap- 
tized neophyte and that, recommended by Diodorus 
of Tarsus to the bishop of Antiorh as a suitable 
candidale for the episcopate, he had been placed 
last on the list, but was chosen by the Emperor 
Theodosius and made bishop while still in hia bap- 
tismal robes. He was not a man of great impor- 
tance. It is possible that he was the Nectarius to 


Trhom Basil addresscil a letter of coosolation on the 
death of hia son. Nor was the earlier career of 
Nectaritia particularly honorable, if the allusion of 
Sozomen [Hial. eccl., VII., x. 2) may be accepted, 
Eia episcopate was equally inglorious. In the con- 
duct of hia office he wan dependent upon the guidance 
of others, the funeral eulogies at court which were 
part of Ills duties were actually delivered by Gregory 
of Nyssa, and he unwisely abrogat«l the office of 
penitential priests. He is Dccoaionally regarded as 
a eainl in the East. Numerous manuscripta ascribe 
to him a eulogy of the martyr Theodore {MPG., 
3Lxxtx., 1331-40), u production of UlUe note except 
for its archeological aUuslona. (F. Loora.) 

BiBunnRAPin: DCB, iv. Il-H (takes u vieir at Nectujiu 

drr rhriMichm Kirr/it unin-'dm Kaii-rr TAmrfnnu.. Frei- 
burg. ISBT; J. Kuau, Dot nirAititrli-tanilaBtmopolilani- 
■cAf Sumbal, Lrjpgic. IMOS; Crillier. / ulnin Kirrtii. r. IH. 
280-282. TheKiuiceaarciuHlGieatly indicitpdiii Ibeteil. 

RECTARIUS: Patriarch of Jeruanleni: b. in 
Crete UiOS; d. about IIJSO, He was educated by 
the nionka of Sinai where he himself became a monk; 
but when thirty-five years of age he studied at 
Athens with the Nco- Aristotelian Tiieophilus Cory- 
dalleua. About inOO he was iu Constantinople on 
business connected with hia moDaalery, and on his 
return to Siiiai was chosen abbot. But on his way 
to Jerusalem to be runsecruted he waa informed 
that he had been choaen patriareh of the Holy City, 
and was consecrated in April, 1G6I. As early as 
1666 be sought to be relieved of hia duties and by 
166il Dosithcua had become his successor. He re- 
mained in Jerusalem, however, except when driven 
by the I.,atiii monks for a short time to Sinai. He 
took part in the Synod of Jerusalem in 1672. 
Among the writings of Ncctarius the moat impor- 
tant is his refutation of the theses of a certain Peter 
jegarding the papal supremacy (ed. Doaitheus, 
with a life of Nectarius, Jasay, 1682). He ia Btill 
better known by his recommendation of the Con- 
/tagio orthodoza oC Mogilos (latest cd., £. Legrand, 
Bibliographic helUnique, ii. 208 aqq., 4 vois., Paris, 
1894-!Ki). A letter to the monks of Sinai is also 
contained in E. Renaudot's Genadii patjiarckre 
ConaUindnnpolitam homilia de tacramcnfo eucharig- 
HtE, etc. (Paris, 1709, pp. ITl-ISi). In his doctrine 
of the Eucharist Nectarius was strictly orthodox, and 
a zealous opponent of Cyril Lucar (q.v.) and the 
" Calvinistic " movement. (F. KATTENnuacH.) 
Bibliooiupht: Bcsldn the biofcniphy anted in the (Fit 
■nd (he work of Legrand, vols, il.-v. ptwim, coruull: 
M. Lp QuicD. Orient Chrilianiu. ill. fi20-S22. Pnriii. 1740; 
A. Pirhler, firirhiclllt dn kirrhlirhrn Trrnnimi nritrhnt 
arm Orirnl und Orvi/jcnf. i. 474-481. Muniah, 18S4 (deaJa 
iritb the tmct agpinat PBlnrl. 

NEESIHA: Foimder of Doshiaha University, 
Kyoto, Japan; b. at Yedo (Tokyo), Japan, Jan. 
(or in Christian reckoning Feb.) 14, 184-3; d. at 
Oiso (40 m. S.W. of Tokyo) Jan. 23, ISOO. In Japan 
he was called Neesima Shimeta, on the ship coming 
to America the captain dubbed him " Joe," when 
he was baptised be added the name of hia benefac- 
tor, and BO he ia now commonly culled Joseph Hardy 
Neesima. His father via/{ of the Samurai class, a 
t«.nelicr of penmanship -ind aecret-ary to his prince, 
and he was bom in the palace. He received an ex- 

cellent education according to Japanese standarda 
at the time. When Commodore Perry came to Yedo 
on July 7, 1S53, his curiosity in the west*m world 
was awakened, and when later he came in contact 
with Dutch traders and learned their language, and 
especially when he read in Chinese Elijah Coleman 
Bridgman's " Churoh History," and William Alex- 
ander Parsons Martin's " Evidences of ChrislJotu^ " 
he determined to visit the lands whence these per- 
sons (qq.v.) hud come and learn the way of truth 
more perfectly. By the connivance of friends be 
was smuegled into an American brig lying in the 
harbor of Hakodate in July, 1864, and reached Bos- 
ton in August, 1865. There he was befriended by 
the prominent merchant, Alpbaeus Hardy, who sent 
him to Phillips Academy, Andover, to the scientific 
department of Amherst College, where he was grad- 
uated B.S. in 1870, and to Andover Theological 
Seminary, where he took a special course with the 
class of 1874. He was liiQ interpreter of the Jap- 
anese embassy in 1871, although hia knowledge of 
the English language was always defective, and as 
a partial reward for his services in this matter be 
received pardon for his capital crime in leaving his 
country without permission. He made no disguise 
of his absorbing desire to promote Christian educa* 
tion in Japan, even when with non-Christian Jap- 
anese. In 1S74 he was appointed a corresponding 
member of the Japanese Mission of the American 
Board of Commiasionera for Foreign Missions, and 
was ordained in Mount Vernon Chureh, Boston, 
Sept. 24, 1S74. Before he sailed he mode a plea for 
his project of a Christian college at the meeting of 
the American Board at Rutland, Vt.. and thus se- 
cured $4,000. He opened it at Kyoto, Nov. 29. 
1875, with eight pupils. The enterprise quickly 
became a success. In 18S4 he made Ilia firat appeal 
for funds to enlarge the college into a univei^ty. 
In 1 885 he returned to America and pleaded so suc- 
cessfully that he made the enlargement ia 1836. In 
1888 and again in tSSO he obtained large aums, not 
only from Americans, but from natives, even from 
non-Christians. In I8SS Ainherst gave him the hon- 
orary doctorate of laws. The name Doahiaha given 
to the university means " one counsel." On Jan. 
3, 1876, he married a Japanese woman. lU-health, 
especially in the later years of his life, compelled him 
to remit his efforts, but he lived for the institution 
which he had founded and which flourished so great- 
ly under him. It has since been carried on, and ia 
1905 reported 5,000 studeuts, and 1,000 gradua(«s, 
but only eighty bad become preachers. 

Bibuuuiui-ut; A. S. Hardy. IA{e and LrStrrt of Joatph 
Hnrdu Ntfima. BoBtoB. 1891; J. D. IJnvis, Sketd\ aftht 
Lijt 0/ Jojrp* Hardu Niaima. LL.D.. New York. 1890. 
3d ed.. leo.'i. 

REFF, FELIX: Swiss Evangelist; b. at Geneva 
Oct. 8, 17D8; d. there Apr. 12, 1S29. He entered, 
when he was sevenUwn years old, upon a military 
career in Ihe garrison of his native city, but was 
aftemard reiiched by the religious revival which at 
tliat time look place in the city, and became a revival 
preacher among his comrades. In 1.SI9 he re- 
signed his position in the army; and May 10, 1823, 
he was ordained in Mr. Clayton's chapel, in the 
Poultiy, London. After laboring for some time at 




Mens, he settled in the lonely valleys of the Qu^ras 
and Fieiasinidre in the Hautes-Alps. Some rem- 
nants of the Waldenses had at one time sought 
refuge there, hut they had utterly degenerated. 
Not only had fights and drunkenness token the 
plaoe of the piety of their ancestors, but they had 
even foigotten the commonest arts, and sunk into 
barbarism. The work which lay before Ne£f in 
that place was almost overwhelming. He per- 
formed ity however, though it cost him his 
life. When in 1827, he returned, dying, to Ge- 
neva, the settlements in the valleys which had 
been the scene of his labors were converted and 

Bibuoorapht: I^ettrea de FHix Neff^ ed. A. Bost, 2 vols., 
Gcnevm, 1842, Ens. transl., Ijettera and Biography of Felix 
Nef, London, 1843; T. 8. Ellerby, MemorkUa of Felix 
Ntf, London, 1833; Vie de Fdix Neff, Pasteur dans lea 
Ha^dm Alpet, in French and Enslish, London. 1836; W. S. 
Gilly, Memoir of Felix Neff, London, 1855; A. Christ, 
FeHx Neg, Basel, 1873; lichtenbenser, ESR, ix. 568- 


Cluuaeter, Location and Extent (S 1). 

Subdirisions and Histoiy (§ 2). 

Cities ci Simeonitic Negeb (f 3). 

Cities of Judaic Negeb and the Border (f 4). 

rihe Negeb is a term which covers the stretch 
of country by which the descent is made from the 
hill country of Judah just south of Hebron to the 
arid desert on the south. This descent is made by 
a series of great terraces with rolling 
I. Chaxacter, hills, cut by a number of wadies run- 

Locaticm, ning east and west. It forms a natural 
and Extent, barrier on the south of Judah, by its 
broken surface and comparatively in- 
fertile soil so completely protecting Judah that the 
latter has seldom been invaded from the south. 
The geology of the region differs from that farther 
south, the ciystalline rocks of the desert being 
covered in the Negeb by soft limestone. Possi- 
bilities of fertility are there, dependent, however, 
upon continual irrigation. There are signs that at 
one time a considerable population maintained 
itself in the region.] Although no precise bound- 
aries are indicated in the Old Testament, the general 
situation is given by the geography of Judah (Josh. 
XV. 21-32), the account of the spies (Num. xiii. 17, 
21-26), and the wanderings of Abraham (Gen. 
zx. 1). The Negeb is often mentioned in connection 
with the other southern parts of the land of Israel 
and with the hill country and the lowland (Judges 
L 9; Deut. i. 7; Josh. x. 40; Jer. xvii. 26). Rira- 
mon was on the northern boundary (Zech. xiv. 10), 
and the boundaries given for Judah (Josh. xv. 1 
sqq.) and for Canaan (Ezek. xlvii. 18-19; Num. 
xxxiv. 3 sqq.) essentially coincide with those of the 
Negeb. Since the eastern boundary varied at dif- 
ferent times, its exact merging with the southern 
boundary of Judah (Josh. xv. 1 sqq.) can not be 
given. On the southern boundary, however, may 
be placed Gerar (cf. Gen. x. 19, xx. 1 ; II Chron. xiv. 
13), especially as the modem Wadi Jerur empties 
westwajrd, through the Wadi al-Sheraif into the 
Wadi al-'Arish or " brook of Egypt," which formed 
the southern boundary of Israel to the sea (Josh. xv. 
3 sqq.; Ezek. xlvii. 19; Num. xxxiv. 4-6), though 

it is not probable that the Negeb extended as far 
as the coast. The Western boundary seems to have 
been still more indistinct than the Eastern. The 
Negeb, therefore, apparently designated in genend 
the level slope of the land to the west of the water- 
shed; and as this merged into the plain without 
marked interruption, the region was without fixed 

Originally Negeb was not a proper name, but 
merely denoted " the dry, parched country." It 
played a small part in history, for it was a region 
of pasturage rather than of settled civilization 
(cf. Josh. xix. 8; Gen. xxv. 16), and remained a 
mere appanage of the settled district, 
2. Subdivi- sometimes abandoned to the Bedouin 

sions and and at other times won for trade and 

History, cultivation by centers of population. 
In the Old Testament the district is 
named in five (or six) ways, according to the tribes 
which controlled it. The Negeb of the Jerahmee- 
lites has been identified with the Jebel and Wadi 
Rahameh about eighteen miles south of Tell al-Milh. 
The Negeb of the Kenites may be sought in the 
southeast, possibly near Kedesh; but if the pref- 
erable reading of the Septuagint, " Kenesites," be 
adopted, this part of the Negeb would abut on the 
Negeb of the Calebites (cf. Judges i. 15; Josh. xv. 
19). But if (Judges i. 16; cf. I Sam. xv. 6) the 
Kenites lived in the vicinity of Arad and were 
neighbors of the Amalekites, the Negeb of the 
Kenites would then be on the watershed some nine 
miles south of Carmel and Maon (cf. Num. xxi. 1). 
The Negeb of the Cherethites lay to the west of 
Beersheba (cf. I Sam. xxx. 14, 16). The Negeb of 
Judah was doubtless a later designation, arising 
after the establishment of the kingdom of Judah, 
and is synonymous with the Negeb of Caleb. Be- 
sides these tribes mention is also made in the Old 
Testament of the Negeb of the Amalekites (Num. 
xiii. 29) and of the Geshurites (I Sam. xxvii. 8). 
So long as the Davidic kings were important rulers, 
the trade routes, especially those to Egypt and to 
Elath on the Red Sea, were under their protection. 
The first of these routes soon lost its importance; 
and the second was lost in the reign of Joram 
(II Kings viii. 20), regained by Azariah (II Kings 
xiv. 19-22), and finally lost to the Judeans with 
Elath and its tributary commerce in the reign of 
Ahaz (II Kings xvi. 6). In the course of the sev- 
enth century the Negeb seems to have come pro- 
gressively under the sway of the Edomites and 
other tribes from Arabia. In postexilic writings, 
therefore, the Negeb was no longer regarded as 
Jewish (Obadiah 19-20; cf. Jer. xiii. 19). The 
Hasmonean dynasty and Herod troubled them- 
selves little about the Negeb. The Romans were 
the first, by their roads, cities, and castles, to reduce 
this district of Canaan. Ptolemy reckoned the 
Negeb partly to Idumjra and partly to Arabia 
Petraea, and in the fifth and sixth centuries the 
Negeb formed part of Palestina Tertia or Salutaris. 
After the Arab conquest in the seventh century and 
particularly after the crusades the Roman struc- 
tures fell into decay and the Bedouin became the 
lords of the district. 

The cities of the Negeb are given partly to Judah 



NesTO Education 



(Josh. XV. 21-32) and partly to Simeon (Josh. xix. 

2-8). Among the cities mentioned as being in 

Simeon was Beersheba (Josh. xix. 2), 

3. Cities of a noted shrine visited by Israelites 
Simeonitic (Amos v. 5, viii. 14), where werie a 

Negeb. tree planted by Abraham (Gen. xxi. 33) 
and an altar built by Isaac (Gen. 
XX vi. 65). The city formed the southern extremity 
of the land inhabited by the Israelitic tribes (II 
Sam. xvii. 11). It was noted for the well from 
which it derived its name, said to have been dug 
by Abraham (Gen. xxi. 30) or Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 
32-33). It was still in the days of Jerome and 
Eusebius a laige village eighteen miles south of 
Hebron. Some churches were seen there by Will- 
iam of Boldensele (1332) and Ludolph of Sudheim 
(1335-41), although the place was then deserted. 
The locations of Moladah and Hazar-shual are un- 
known. Azem suggests Azmon on the southwestern 
boundary of Canaan (Nimi. xxxiv. 4 sqq.). Hor- 
mah is probably identical with the place where David 
sent presents of Amalekite booty (Josh. xv. 30; I 
Sam. XXX. 30). Ziklag lay northwest or west of 
Beersheba (I Sam. xxx.), perhaps in the Qirbet 
Zu^aili^e, e.s.e. of Gaza. Beth-marcaboth (Josh, 
xix. 5), or Madmannah (Josh. xv. 31), was Calebitic 
(I Chron. ii. 49). Shaaraim (I Chron. iv. 31), or 
Shilhim (Josh. xv. 32), apparently corresponds to a 
place mentioned in an inscription of Thothmes III. 
between Tanis and Gaza. Ain and Rimmon, ap- 
parently the £n-Rimmon of Nehemiah xi. 29, is 
apparently the modem Umm al-Ramamin, nine 
miles north of Beersheba. 

In the Negeb of Judah, Kinah may be associated 
with the nomadic Kenites (I Sam. xxx. 29). Ada- 
dah is probably the modem 'Ar'ara, three hours 
southeast of Beersheba. The Kedesh of Joshua xv. 
24 may perhaps be the Eadus mentioned by al- 
Mut^addasi as a day's journey southeast of Hebron. 
Hazor is perhaps the modem al- 

4. Cities of Quderah, while Ithnan may be the 
Judaic Calebite Ethnan of I Chron. iv. 7. 
Negeb Ziph must not be confused with the 

and the Calebite place of the same name be- 
Border. tween Carmel and Juttah (Josh, x v. 55) . 
Telem is apparently the Telaim of 
I Sam. XV. 4y and so the eastern boundary of the 
Amalekites. Bealoth seems to have been located 
to the northeast of Kadesh-Bamea. Kerioth- 
Hezron (Josh. xv. 25) was a Calebite site and may 
denote the plateau north of the Wadi Marrah. 
The Shema of Josh. xv. 26 appears to be connected 
with Simeon. In the list in Nehemiah xi. 26 it is 
represented by Jeshua, which has been identified 
with 5irbat Sa*weh, north of Tell al-MiHi. Tamar, 
which formed a southern boundary of Israel in the 
east (Ezek. xlvii. 18-19; xlviii. 28), was located 
by the OnomasHcon of Eusebius (ed. Lagarde, 210, 
85) a day's journey from Mapsis. The Medeba 
mosaic (see Medeba) likewise locates Tamar south 
of the Dead Sea at the eastern foot of the mountain 
east of Mapsis, and it is apparently identical with 
the Tamar built by Solomon (Hebr. of I Kings ix. 
18, A. v., Tadmor) to protect the southern trade 
route. Kadesh-Bamea (Deut. i. 19, 46), lying on 
the southern boundary of Israel (cf. Num. xx. 1) 

and between Tamar and the brook of Egypt (Ettk, 
xlvii. 19, xlviii. 28; cf. Niun. xxxiv. 4), was east of 
Gerar (Gen. xx. 1) and was long inhabited by Israel- 
itic tribes. The site corresponds to the modem 
'Ain ^adis. Its vicinity is cisdled the wilderness of 
Kadesh (Ps. xxix. 8) or the wilderness of Zin (Num. 
XX. 1, 22; Deut. xxxii. 51). Here Moses brou^t 
water from the rock by his staff, whence the spring 
was called '^ the water of strife " (Num. xx. 2 sqq.; 
Deut. xxxiii. 8). This latter name, however, is 
associated in Ex. xvii. 2-7 with Massah and located 
on Horeb; and Massah seems originally to have 
been distinct from Kadesh, or Meribah, though 
later identified with it. Kadesh was also the place 
where Miriam, the sister of Moses, died and was 
buried. The place was called also En-mishpat 
(Gen. xiv. 7), and seems to have been the scene of 
a battle against the Amalekites (Ex. xvii.), and 
possibly the occasion of the expedition of Saul de- 
scribed in I Sam. xv. 

The Negeb also included the wells Esek, Sitnah, 
and Rehoboth, dug by the servants of Isaac ((Sen. 
xxvi. 19-22). The two latter have been identified 
with the remains of an ancient city with wells some 
eighteen miles southwest of Beersheba. The term 
Negeb was also often used to connote the south (e.g.. 
Gen. xiii. 14), and in Daniel even denotes Egypt 
(xL 5 sqq.; and possibly also in Isa. xxx. 6). See 
Palestine, II., § 2. (H. Guthe.) 

Biblioorapht: The three woria of moment are: RolHiieon, 
Retearche*, vol. iii.; A. Muail, Arabia PetraOt vol. ii., parti 
1-2, Vienna, 1907-08; and E. H. Pahner, Desert of the Ex- 
odus, vol. ii., ib. 1871. Consult further: G. Williams, The 
Holy City, i. 463-468, 487 sqq., London, 1849; E. Wilton, 
The Neytb or " SouthCovniry " of Scripture, ib. 1863; H. B. 
Tristram, The Land of lerad, ib. 1865; V. Qu4rin, Deacrip- 
tion de la Palestine, part I.« JudU, v<A. in., 7 vols., Paris, 
1868-80; H. C. Trumbull. Kadesh Bamea, New York, 
1884; F. Buhl, Geographie von PaUtatina, Freibuis, 1896; 
G. A. 8mith, Historical Oeography of the Holy Land, pip. 278 
sqq., London, 1897; H. Guthe, PalAsHna, Bielefeld, 1907; 
DB, iii. 606-606; BB, iii. 3374-«0. 


I. Education. Lackof Eariy Missionary 

Early Status (§ 1). Effort (S 2). 

In the Northern Statee Efforts for Negro Evan- 

(§ 2). gelisation (§ 3). 
In the South (§ 3). Results (§ 4). 
Benevolent Societies (§ 4)^ 2. StatastioB. 
EkiucationalAcencieB(§6). 3. Denominational Evan- 
Results (i 6). gelisation. 
II. Evangelisation. a. Methodists. 
1. General History. b. Baptists. 
Religious Condition of 
Early Slaves (§1). 

I. Education: Negro slaves imported to America 
were kept designedly in ignorance. The written 
and unwritten law of the land was that Negroes 
should receive no instruction. In the North this 

custom gradually was given up, but 
I. Early with the cotton gin in the South it 
Status, crystallized into law. The law of 

Georgia (1829) is typical: "If any 
slave, Negro or free person of color, or any white 
person shall teach any other slave, Negro or free 
person of color to read or write, either written or 
printed characters, the same free person of color 
or slave shall be punished by fine and whipping, or 
fine or whipping, at the discretion of the court; and 
if a white person so offend, he, she, or they shall be 




NesTO Education 

punished with a fine not exceeding %500 and im- 
pnaonment in the oommoa jail at Uie discretion of 
the court." Such laws were broken by individual 
fdanters here and there in the case of favorite house- 
servants; but in general they were enforced. In 
the northem states few actual prohibitory laws 
were enacted, but ia Connecticut, New York, Penn- 
qrlvania, Ohio, and elsewhere, mob violence fre- 
quently arose against Negro schools, and in Connec- 
ticut the teaching of Negroes was restricted in 1833. 
Notwithstanding this attitude Negro schools early 
developed. In the North such schools fall roughly 
under five different periods: (1) 1704 to 1774, period 
of the pioneers; (2) 1774 to 1820, efforts of the free 
Negroes; (3) 1820 to 1835, period of partial public 
aid; (4) 1835 to 1870, period of separate public 
sehods; (5) 1870 to 1£^, period of mixed schools. 
In the first period fell the epoch-making efforts 
and far-seeing sacrifice of Elias Neau in New York 
and Anthony Benezet in Philadelphia. One of the 
first Negro schools in the land, if not the first, was 
that established in New York by Elias Neau in 
1704. He gathered slaves and free 
2. In the Negroes, to the number of 200, in 
Horfhem his own house nightly, and kept the 
States, school open until his death in 1722. 
So, too, Anthony Benezet and the 
Quakers of Philadelphia opened a Negro school in 
1700, which has had a continuous existence until 
our day. After the revolution the free Negroes 
were quickened to exertions in many directions, 
especially in founding churches, beneficial societies, 
and schools. In Massachusetts a Negro school was 
formed at the house of Prince Hall, in 1798, and the 
teacher paid by the Negroes. In 1807 the Negroes 
of the District of Coliunbia, led by Bell, Franklin, 
and Liverpool, three free Negroes, founded the first 
Negro school. This school, supported by the Ne- 
groes, lapsed for awhile, but was revived in 1818, 
and many other schools were supported simultane- 
ously. In Ohio the Negroes of Cincinnati opened 
a school of their own about 1820, and in New York 
the Negroes rallied to the support of the Old Neau 
school. No record is available of the moneys thus 
spent by Negroes for education, but at a later period, 
1839, it is instructive to know that the Negroes of 
Qncinnati alone were paying nearly a thousand 
dollars a year ($889.03) for their schools. The 
energy and persistence of the Negroes led to benevo- 
lence and {partial state aid. At first the State made 
no efforts to educate Negroes. In 1800 the Negroes 
of Boston tried to get the city to adopt their school, 
but it refused. About 1806 the city was induced 
to grant $200 a year to the school, and the children 
paid 12} cents a week as tuition. It was claimed 
at the time that technically the public schools were 
opened to Negroes, but no inducements were offered 
to make them attend, and the abstract right was 
rarely tested. In 1812 the Negro school was 
adopted by the city. A benevolent society con- 
ducted the Negro schools in New York until 1834, 
when the city took hold. In Ohio the Negroes 
were excluded from white schools in 1828, and 
practicaliy no provision was made for them save 
through benevolence until 1849. The attempt to 
open private schods for Negroes was frowned upon 

as in the Prudence Crandall case, and nearly all 
higher institutions, except Oberliu, were closed to 
Negroes. From about 1835 on it became general for 
the northem states to support wholly a separate 
system of Negro schools. They were usually poorer 
than those for whites, being worse taught, worse 
equipped, and wretchedly housed. Beginning with 
Massachusetts, in 1855, these separate schools have 
been abolished in nearly all northem states. 

The history of schools for Negroes in the South 
falls also in five main epochs: (1) the ante-beUimi 
schools; (2) the army schools; (3) the schools of 
the Freedmen's Bureau; (4) the missionary schools; 
and (5) the public schools. 

Some few schools for Negroes existed here and 

there in the South before the war. In the District 

of Columbia, as already mentioned, 

3. In the no less than fifteen different schools 
South. were conducted between 1800 and 1861, 
mainly at the expense of the colored 
people. In Maryland, St. Frances Academy, for 
colored girls, was founded by the Roman Catholics 
in 1829. In North Carolina there were before 1835 
several schools maintained by the free Negroes. 
They had usually white teachers. After 1835 the 
few clandestine schools were taught by Negroes. 
In Charleston, S. C, there was a school for Negroes 
opened in 1744, which lasted some ten years. It 
was taught by a Negro and was for free Negroes 
only, although some slaves who hired their time 
managed to send their children there. Free Negroes 
in Georgia used to send children to Charleston for 
education. They retumed and opened clandestine 
schools in Georgia. In Savannah a French Negro, 
Julien Froumontaine, from San Domingo, conducted 
a free Negro school openly from 1819 to 1829, and 
secretly for some time after. Schools were stopped 
nearly everywhere after 1830, and as slavery became 
more and more a commercial venture all attempts 
at Negro education were given up. During the war 
the first complication that confronted the armies 
was the continual arrival of fugitive slaves within 
the Union lines. At first the commands were rigid 
against receiving them. " Hereafter," \iTote Hal- 
leck early in the war, " no slaves should be allowed 
to come within your lines at all." Other generals, 
however, thought differently. Some argued that 
confiscating slaves would weisiken the South, others 
were imbued with abolition sentiment for right's 
sake. Twice attempts were made to free the slaves 
of certain localities by proclamation, ^ut these or- 
ders were countermanded by the president. Still 
the fugitives poured into the lines and gradually 
were used as laborers and helpers. Immediately 
teaching began and schools sprang up. Wlien at 
last the emancipation proclamation was issued and 
Negro soldiers called for, it was necessary to pro- 
vide more systematically for Negroes. Various 
systems and experiments grew up here and there. 
The freedmen were massed in large numbers at 
Fortress Monroe, Va., Washington, D. C, Beaufort, 
and Port Royal, S. C, New Orleans, La., Vicksburg 
and Corinth, Miss., Columbus, Ky., Cairo, III., and 
elsewhere. In such places schools immediately 
sprang up under the army officers and chaplains. 
The most elaborate system, perhaps, was that under 


Negrro Education 
Neffro Bvanffelization 



Greneral Banks in Louisiana. It was established in 
1863 and soon had a regular board of education, 
which laid and collected taxes and supported even- 
tually nearly 100 schools ^ith 10,000 pupils, under 
162 teachers. At Port Royal, S. C, were gathered 
Edward Lillie Pierce's " ten thousand clients." 
Pierce began the organization of relief societies in 
the North and established an economic system with 
schools. Eventually they passed under the over- 
sight of General Rufus Saxon, who sold forfeited 
estates, leased plantations, received the camp fol- 
lowers of Sherman's march to the sea, and en- 
couraged schools. In the West, General Grant 
appointed Colonel John Eaton, afterward United 
States Conmiissioner of Education, to be superin- 
tendent of freedmen in 1862. He sought to con- 
solidate and regulate the schools already established, 
and succeeded in organizing a large system. The 
Freedmen's Bureau was especially active in the 
establishment of schools for Negroes. In General 
Howard's first Freedmen 's Bureau report, he says: 
'* Schools were taken in charge by the Bureau, and 
in some States carried on wholly in connection with 
local efforts — by use of a refugees' and freedmen 's 
fund which had been collected from various sources. 
Teachers came under the general direction of the 
assistant conunissioners, and protection through 
the department commanders was given to all en- 
gaged in the work." 

The increase of Negro education, 1866-1870, is 
thus reported by the Freedmen 's Bureau: 






















lent Afwo- 













Total . 



The chief benevolent society was the American 
Missionary Association, and next in importance 
came the various Freedmen 's Union Commissions, 
the Freedmen 's Aid Society of the 
4. Benevolent Methodist Episcopal Church, the Bap- 
Societies, tist Home Mission Society, and Board 
of Missions of the Presbyterian Church. 
Besides these the Episcopalians, Roman Catholics, 
and Friends did some work. The American Mis- 
sionary Association, representing the Congrega- 
tional Church, still maintains three colleges with high 
schools attached, one theological school, twenty-six 
high and industrial schools, and seven graded 
schools; these schools have about 450 instructors 

and 14,000 students. The woik di Northern Bj^>' 
tists among Negroes is carried on by the American 
Baptist Home Mission Society. This society in 
the last forty years has spent about $4,000,000 in 
educational work, and is spending now $140,000 
a year in educational &nd mission work. It main- 
tains and aids thirty-two schools, of which thir- 
teen are high schools and eight high schools with 
additional college departments. In these schooU 
there were, in 1907, 342 teachers and 7,746 stu- 
dents; the value of school property was $1,576,450; 
the students pay $42,000 a year in tuition, and 
Negro churches and individuals $27,000 a year. 
The work of the Presbyterian Church for Negro edu- 
cation is carried on through the Board of ICissions 
for Freedmen, which represents work begun as early 
as 1864. The church property used and owned by 
the board is worth $670,000, besides $122,000 in- 
vested in funds. There are the following schoob: 
one college preparatory school, five girls' schools, 
thirteen boarding schools, and ninety-five graded 
schools; in all, 114 schools, with 13,576 pupils. The 
patrons of the schools paid in $72,000, in addition 
to $72,229 contributed by the board. The work of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church among Negroes is 
done through the Freedmen 's Aid and Southern 
Educational Society (oi^anized August, 1866). This 
society had, in 1904-05, twenty -four institu- 
tions; including one theological school, three medi- 
cal schools, ten schools with college and preparatoiy 
departments, and eleven academies, with 409 teach- 
ers, 7,924 students, and property valued at $1,352,- 
258. Between August, 1866, and June 30, 1905, the 
society had expended for educational work in the 
South, chiefly among Negroes, but partially among 
whites, $7,800,000. Students pay about $90,000 
a year in tuition at present; 200,000 pupils have 
been instructed, of whom 3,000 entered the ministry, 
12,000 have become teachers, 800 have become phy- 
sicians, pharmacists, and dentists. Negro churches 
also support schools: the African Methodists spend 
$70,000 a year on twenty-five schools with 3,700 
pupils, and have $500,000 in school property. 
The Colored Methodists have five schools, and the 
Zion Methodists nine; the latter collect $17,000 a 
year for their schools and have $134,950 in school 
property. The Negro Baptists have 107 schools, 
chiefly small graded schools, with property valued at 
$737,377, and expenditures in 1906 amounting to 
$148,883.50. They have 16,664 students enrolled. 

The most prominent Negro schools are five col- 
leges, with preparatory and other departments: 
Howard University, Washington, D. C; Fisk Uni- 
versity, Nashville, Tenn.; Atlanta University, At- 
lanta, Ga.; Wilberforce University, Wilberforce, O.; 
Virginia Union University, Richmond, 

5. Educa- Va. Eight high and industrial schools, 
tional with higher work: Talladega, Ala.; 

Agencies. Tuskegee, Ala.; Brick, N.C.; Lincoln, 
Pa.; Straight, La.; Biddle, N. C; 
Hampton, Va.; Qaflin, S. C. Three high and in- 
dustrial schools for girls: Spellman, Ga.; Scotia, 
N. C; Hartshorn, Va. Four professional schools: 
Howard University (medicine, law, and pharmacy). 
Gammon (theology), Mehany (medicine and phar- 
macy), and Shaw (medicine and pharmacy). Gam- 


Kerro Bdnottitlon 
RavTo BTULBvllntlon 

toon. Brick, and Mebairy are well endowed ; Tuake- 
gee, Hampton, Howard, and Talladega have some 
endowment. The rest have small funds. 

Four qiGcial funds for Negro education have been 
provided; (1) The Peabody fund of 12,000,000 
given in 1867 and 1869. The income of this fund 
has gone principally to the education of the whites, 
but a small part has provided teachers, institutes, 
mod Bchoola for N^roes. (2) The John F. Siater 
fund of «1,000,000 given m 1882. The income of 
this food has been given exclusively to Negro schools 
mud more espeeinlly to industrial schools. (3) The 
Daniel Hand fund of $1,500,891.25, given to the 
American MissioDaiy Association in 1SS8 for edu- 
cating needy N^ro students. (4) The Jeanes fund, 
of »1,000,000, was given by Mius Anna T. Jeanes; 
Hm income goes lo Negro rural education, chiefly 

There are the following 127 private institutions 
(or Negroes, including certain state-aided schools: 















Besides the private schools tliero ia in the South 
« leparate N^ro public-school system. The gov- 
miments of the southern stales which survived the 
mr made few attempts to establish public-school 
■yatema, part.icularly so far as Negroes were con- 
cerned. They especially feared idle- 
6. Results, ness and social revolution on the part 
of the blacks, and sought to keep them 
in serfdom. Alabama, for instance, declared " stub- 
bom or refractory eervanta " or thoee who " loiter 
away their time " to be vagrants, who could be 
hired out at compulsory service by law, while all 
Negro minors, far from being sent to school, were to 
be " apprenticed," preferably to their fathers' 
foimer "masters and mistresses." The enfran- 
chisement of the Negro changed this. The so-called 
" carpet-bag " govemmenls, which under the sway 
of the anny and the Freedmen's Bureau succeeded 
the state governments at war lime, have undoubt- 
edly many sins to answer for. Supported by ig- 
norant and unlettered Negroes, and led in many 
uses by unscrupulous Northerners and Southerners, 
they were e.Ttnivagant and oft*n ludicrous. And 
yet, as Albion Winegar Tourgee says: " they insti- 
Iflttd a public-school system in o r^on where 
publie Bcboola bad been unknown." There have 

been enrolled in the Negro public schools i. 
South the following children; 





- -^-Vil 


■■ ^^ 


■ ■ |^-|*^ 



.. ,002,313 

■■ ffl« 


8»»-Bo: : : : : ; 

. • Subjoct to 

.. ,iiB,s6a 

.. .140,405 

.. :2i:(,092 

.. 1.296.059 
■OTTection by L 

, . . ,878.932 

::: laaorm 

In 1905-06. 55.27 per cent of the Negroes five to 
eighteen years of age were enrollud in school, and 
of these 60,98 per cent were in daily attendance. 
There were 129 public high schools (53 of these 
being in Texas and Missouri) with 891 teachers and 
45,037 students. To these may be added the pri- 
vate and state schools (ut sup.). Of these studenta 
less than 3,000 are in college courses, 736 were 
studying theology, 125 law, liiO medicine, 106 den- 
tistry, S8 pharmacy, and 186 nurse training. These 
public tichools, save in the case of a few city systems, 
have been paid for by the Negro population. It 
has been estimated that in the yeare 1870-99 the 
Negro school systems of the former slave states did 
not cost the white twtpayers a cent, except possibly 
in a few city syatemg, 

Cmlof Nhio srhoola, 1S70-O9 . .tSD.RSS.S71 . 48 
Eati[aiit«>atotAl dirccL taxia puJd by N^rooa 

1870-90 125,000,000 00 

IndiiHt tExn and uto raCa ab&ir, o! eadow- 


AppmxiDulc total, 1870-90 170,000,000.00 

Of the cost of their private schools also the Ne- 
groes bear a large share. The cost of seventy-four 
leading schools for the last nine years has been a 
little under $12,000,000, and the Negroes paid about 
45 per cent of the total cost. Diehard R. Wright, 
Jr., concludes " that it is probably true that the 
Negroes pay possibly a larger percentage of the cost 
of their schools than any other group of jioor people 
in America. The Negroes have paid in direct 
property and poll taxes more than 845,000,000 
during the past forty years. They have contributed 
at least 115,000,000 to education through their 
churches. The Negro student possibly pays a 
larger percentage of the running expenses of the 
institutions which he attends than any other 
student in the land " {Sflf Help in Na/ro Education, 
Cheyney, Pa., 1909). 

The result, of this education on the illiteracy of 
the Negro has been as follows; Negroes ten yeara of 
Qge and over, per cent of illiteracy: 1870, 79.9 
per cent; 1880, 70 per cent; 1890, 57.1 per cent; 
1900, 44.5 per cent. At present probably two- 
thirds of the Negro Americans can read and write. 
Further results can be seen in the occupations of 
Negroes, the spread of organized effort, the publi- 
cation of books and newspapers, and the apfwarance 
of men and women of distinction. 

n. Evangelization. 1. General HlBtory: Negro 
slaves arrived in America with that strong tendency 


NeffTo Evanffellsatlon 



to Nature worship and that belief in witchcraft 
common to all primitive peoples. Some had more 
or less vague ideas of a supreme being and higher 
religious ideas, while a few were Mohanmiedans, 
and fewer Christians. Some actual 
l.Beli^otui priests were transported and others 
Oondition assimied the functions of priests, and 
of Early soon a form of African religion and 
Slaves, witchcraft appeared in the West In- 
dies, which was known as Obi, or 
sorcery. The French Creoles called it Vaudois 
(" Waldensian "), because of the witchcraft charged 
against the followers of Peter Waldo, whence comes 
the dialect term Voodoo or Hoodoo. While in its 
origins the system was undoubtedly African, and 
part of some more or less well-defined religious sys- 
tem, it often degenerated into mere imposture. 
There were probably traces of blood sacrifice and 
worship of the moon, but unfortunately information 
comes not from serious students of curious human 
phenomena, but rather from persons apparently 
unable to understand why a transplanted heathen 
should cling to heathen rites. The most obvious rea- 
son for the spread of witchcraft and persistence of 
heathen rites among Negro slaves was the fact that 
at first no effort was made by masters to offer them 
anything better, due to the wide-spread idea that it 
was contraiy to law to hold Christians as slaves, an 
idea which had become well established by the end 
of the sixteenth century. This did not involve any 
wide-spread abhorrence of forced labor from serfs or 
apprentices, and it was linked with the idea that the 
enslavement of the heathen was meritorious, since 
it punished their blasphemy on the one hand and 
gave them a chance for conversion on the other. 
When, therefore, the slave-trade from Africa began 
it met only feeble opposition here and there. That 
opposition was in nearly all cases stilled when it 
was stated that the slave-trade was a method of 
converting the heathen to Christianitjt The cor- 
ollary that the conscience of Europe immediately 
drew was that after conversion the Negro slave was 
to become in all essential respects like other serv- 
ants and laborers, bound to toil under general 
regulations, but personally free with recognized 
rights and duties. Most colonists believed that this 
was not only actually right, but according to Eng- 
lish law. And while they early began to combat 
the idea they continually doubted the legality of 
their action in English courts. 

It was not until 1667 that Virginia attacked the 

issue squarely and declared by law: ** Baptisme 

doth not alter the condition of the per- 

2. Lack son as to his bondage or freedom, in 

of Early order that diverse masters freed from 

Missionary this doubt may more carefully endeavor 

Effort, the propagation of Christianity " 

(quoted from a law passed in Virginia 

in 1667; cf. Henning,^ Statutes, vol. ii., p. 260). 

Following this Virginia took three further steps in 

1670, 1682, and 1705. First she declared that only 

slaves imported from Christian lands should be 

free. Next she excepted Negroes and mulattoes 

from even this restriction unless they were bom of 

Christians and were Christians when taken into 

slavery. Finally personal Christianity in Africa or 

actual freedom in a Christian country exempted a 
Virginia Negro slave from lifelong slavery. This 
changing attitude of Christians toward Negroes was 
reflected in John Locke's Fundamental ConsUttUums 
of South Carolina (published in B. R. Carroll, Hi^ 
torical Collections of South Carolina, vol. ii.. New 
York, 1836), one article of which read: " Since diar- 
ity obliges us to wish well to the souls of aD men, 
and religion ought to alter nothing in any man's dvil 
estate or right, it shall be lawful for slaves as well as 
others to enter themselves and to be of what church 
and profession any of them shall think best^ and 
thereof be as fully members as any freeman. But 
yet no slaves shall be hereby exempted from the 
civil dominion his master hath over him, but be m 
all things in the same state and condition he was in 
before." So much did this please the Carolinas that 
it was one of the few articles reenacted in the con- 
stitution of 1688. It is clear from these citations 
that in the seventeenth century not only was there 
little missionary effort to convert Negro slaves, but 
'that there was, on the contrary, positive refusal to 
let slaves be converted, and that this refusal was 
one incentive to explicit statements of the doctrine 
of perpetual slavery for Negroes. The French Code 
Noir of 1685 made baptism and religious instruction 
of Negroes obligatory. There was no such legisla- 
tion in English colonies. In Massachusetts John 
Elliot and Cotton Mather both were much con- 
cerned that " so little care was taken of their [the 
Negroes'] precious and immortal souls," which 
were left to " a destroying ignorance merely for fear 
of thereby losing the benefit of their vassalage." 
So throughout the colonies it was reported in 1678 
that masters, ^^ out of covetousness," refuse to allow 
their slaves to be baptized; and in 1700 there was 
an earnest plea in Massachusetts for religious in- 
struction of Negroes since it was " notorious " that 
masters discourage the " poor creatures " from hsip- 
tism. In 1709 a Carolina clergyman wrote to the 
secretary of the Society for the Propagation of the 
Gospel in England that only a few of 200 or more 
Negroes in his conmiunity were taught Christian- 
ity, and they were not allowed to be baptised. This 
state of affairs led to further laws, and the instruc- 
tions to some of the royal governors contain a clause 
ordering them to ** find out the best means to facili- 
tate and encourage the conversion of Negroes and 
Indians to the Christian religion." 

In 1729 an appeal from several colonies was made 

to England on the subject in order to increase the 

conversion of blacks. The crown attorney and 

solicitor-general replied that baptism in no way 

changed the slave's status. The first oiganised 

effort to convert slaves was by the So- 

8. Efforts ciety for the Propagation of the Gos- 

for Negro j j^^ Foreign Parts. In 1702 some 

Evansreliza- ^ . , ^i i.t » 

tion. work was done among the Negroes of 

Carolina, and in 1704 a Negro school 
was established in New York, under Elias Neau, a 
French Protestant. The records of the society 
abundantly establish the fact that the greatest 
obstruction to the religious instruction of the Ne- 
groes was in the masters themselves. From 1711 
to 1783 thousands of sermons and leaflets advo- 
cating the conversion of slaves were distributed in 



Nasro B vangeHgatiaii 

America. In 1783-84, soon after the separation of 
the colonies from the mother country, the society's 
operations ceased, leaving in all the colonies forty- 
three missionarieSy two of whom were in the SouUi- 
em states, one in North Carolina and one in South 
Carolina. The Moravians or United Brethren were 
the first who formally attempted the establishment 
of missions exclusively to the Negroes, cooperating 
with the trustees under the will of Dr. Bray, who 
left funds for convertinjg the slaves of Carolina. 
Finally Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians 
b^an efforts among the slaves more or less spas- 

Thus the efforts to convert Negroes in America 
fall in three main periods: The first period was early 
in the eighteenth century after it was decided that 
baptism did not free slaves. Results were meager, 
and the effort spasmodic. A second period came 
between the Revolutionary war and 1S20, when the 
" Cotton Kingdom " came into being. More was 
accomplished in this period, though " on the whole 
but a minority of the Negroes, and that a small one, 
attended regularly the house of God; and, taking 
them as a class, their religious instruction was ex- 
tensivdy and most seriously neglected.'' The third 
period followed after the depression of the thirties. 
Tills depression was severe, and lasted nearly twenty 
years. For instance, the Presbyterian Synod of 
South Carolina and Geoigia, in 1833, said of the 
daves: "There are over two millions of human 
beings in the condition of heathen and some of them 
in a worse condition. They may justly be consid- 
ered the heathen of this coimtry, and will bear a 
comparison with heathen in any country in the 

As the result of such appeals a reaction set in 
about 1835, and the Methodists and Baptists espe- 
cially were active among the slaves. By 1840 enough 
had been done to furnish Negroes with their own 
ministers and missionaries and to es- 
tablish mmibers of Negro churches. 
A minister in Mississippi testified that he had charge 
of the Negroes of five plantations and 300 slaves; 
another in Georgia visited eighteen plantations 
every two weeks. "The owners have built three 
good churches at their own expense, all framed; 
290 members have been added, and about 400 chil- 
dren are instructed." Another traveling minister 
declaiesy in 1841, that in many places like Baltimore, 
Alexandria, and Charleston, the Negroes had laige, 
spacious churches. This religious activity among 
Negroes brought to the front a number of distin- 
guished Negro preachers: Nat Turner and Deiunark 
Vesey, who led insurrections; Richard Allen, who 
founded the African Methodist Episcopal Church 
(see Methodists, IV., 6); Abraham Jones, the 
first Negro Protestant Episcopal rector; Harry 
Hosier, the companion of Bishop Asbury; George 
lisle, the West Indian missionary, and Lott Carey, 
the African missionary. To these may be added 
the names of Lemuel Haynes, who pastored white 
New England churches; John Chavis, who taught 
a fashionable white school in North Carolina; 
Heniy Evans, a black missionary to whites and 
Negroes; James Varick, who founded the Zion 
Methodist Church; Jack of Virginia, Ralph Free- 

4. Basalts. 

man, and Lunsford Lane, — thirteen remarkable 

The gradual increase of these Negro Christians, 
however, brought peculiar problems. Clergymen, 
despite the law, were reproached for taking Negroes 
into the church and still allowing them to be held 
as slaves. On the other hand, it was not easy to 
know how to deal with the black church-member 
after he was admitted. He must either be a sub- 
ordinate member of a white church or a member of 
a Negro church under the general supervision of 
whites. As the efforts of missionaries slowly in- 
creased the niunber of converts, both these systems 
were adopted. But the black congregations here 
and there soon aroused suspicion and fear of the 
masters, and as early as 1715 North Carolina passed 
an act which declared: ** That if any master or 
owner of Negroes or slaves, or any other person or 
persons whatsoever on the government, shall per- 
mit or suffer any Negro or Negroes to build on their, 
or either of their, lands, or any part thereof, any 
house under pretense of a meeting-house upon ac- 
count of worship, or upon any pretense whatsoever, 
and shall not suppress and hinder them, he, she, or 
they so offending, shall, for every default, forfeit 
and pay fifty pounds, one-half toward defraying 
the contingent chaiges of government, the other to 
him or them that shall sue for the same.'' This 
made Negro members of a white church a neces- 
sity in this colony, and there was the same tendency 
in other colonies. It gradually became true, as 
Brackett says, that *' any privileges of church going 
which slaves might enjoy depended much, as with 
children, on the disposition of the masters." After 
the Civil War the Negroes were segregated in their 
own churches in the South and to some extent in 
the North. 

2. StatisticB. [The distribution of the Negroes 
in the churches as given in the appended tables 
may receive some illumination and interest from 
the following facts. The first church in the United 
States to receive Negroes was the Anglican, the 
baptism of a Negro child taking place in Virginia 
in 1624. There has always been a considerable 
proportion of the Negro population in fellowship 
with this church and its successor, the Protestant 
Episcopal. The ceremonial of the ser\dce is grateful 
to the Negro mind, and the rolls of the Protestant 
Episcopal ministry include over 150 Negro preachers 
since the first, Alexander Crummell, was ordained 
in 1839. The connection with the Methodist com- 
munion was inevitable. The strongly emotional 
element in the Negro mind receives the appeal of 
vigorous Methodist evangelism with special favor. 
This relationship with the Methodist bodies began 
as early as the activity of Bishop Thomas Coke 
(q.v.), whose servant, Harry Hosier (d. 1810), was a 
noted colored minist<^r. Almost as inevitable was the 
trend of the Negro toward the Baptist denomination. 
Here the attractive element was the symbolism of 
immersion. The explanation given above for the at- 
traction to the Protestant Episcopal Church applies 
with equal force to the Roman Catholic conmiunion. 
The next denominations in point of strength, Pres- 
byterians and Congregationalists, do not enlist so 
strongly the mental leanings of the race.] 


JXegro Evanffelisatlon 





All denominationa oonaistinK in whole or in part of 
colored organisationa 

Denominations consistins wholly of colored organisa- 

Baptist bodies: 

Baptists — ^National Convention 

Colored Primitive Baptists in America ^ 

United American Freewill Baptists 

Church of God and Saints of Christ 

Churches of the Living God: 

Church of the Living God (Christian Workers for Friend- 

Church of the Living God (Apostolic Church) 

Church of CJhrist in God 

Evangelistic associations: 

Voluntary Missionary Society of America 

Free Christian Zion Church of Christ 

Methodist bodies: 

Union American Methodist Episcopal Church 

African Methodist Episcopal Churoi 

African Union Methodist Protestant Church 

African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church I 

Ck)ngregational Methodist 

Colored Methodist Episcopal Church 

R4eformed Zion Union Apostolic Church 

Reformed Methodist Umon Episcopal Church 

Evangelist Missionary Church 

Presbyterian bodies: 

Colored Cumberland Presbyterian Church 



















Denominations consisting in part of colored organisa- 

Adventist bodies: 

Advent (]!hristian Church 

Seventh-day Adventist Denomination 

Baptist bodies: 

Baptists — Northern (Convention 

Baptists — Southern Convention 

Free Baptists 

Primitive Baptists • 

Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists 

Christians (Christian Connection) 

Churches of God in North America, General Eldership of the 


Disciples or Christians : 

Disciples of Christ 

C!hurches of Christ 

Independent churches 

Lutheran bodies: 

United Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Churdi in 
the South 

General 0>uncil of the Evangelical Lutheran C!hurch in 
North America 

Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of America. . . 
Methodist bodies: 

Methodist Episcopal C!hurch 

Methodist Protestant Church 

Wesleyan Methodist O>nnection of America 

Independent Methodists 

Moravian bodies: 

Moravian C!hurch (Unitas Fratrum) 

Presbyterian bodies: 

Presbyterian C!hurch in the United States of America .... 

Cumberland Presbyterian C!hurch 

Presbyterian Church in the United States 

A8.sociate Reformed Synod of the South 

Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian (^urch of North 


Protestant Episcopal Church 

Reformed bodies: 

Reformed Church in America 

Reformed Episcopal CJhurch 

Roman Catholic Church 

United Brethren bodies: 

Church of the United Brethren in CThrist 


























































































[ 18.578 





' i.568 


Valub of Chubch 
Pbopbbtt Rbpobtbo. 



















































[ 176.795 





* '22.266 





1 The organizations shown for this denomination in 1890 were returned at that census as belonging to the Primitive Bap- 
tist denomination. 

* The colored organizations returned for this denomination in 1890 are included in the present report as bdonging to 
the Colored Primitive Baptists in America. 


NagTO Eyuts«llsKtfoB 











of 0^"- 




































2. SOD 













3.380. 22S 












1,040. 14S 













































■ Okkbom* and Indiui Territory oombioed. 

S. DenomliiJttlaiialBvajiKelixBtioii: Evangeliia. 
lion of Negroes through the various eecta may be 
art forth as followa: 

a. Xethodista: The history of the Negro in t 
Methodist Episcopal Church la of far-reaching i 
terest in any study of the relation of the white and 
black races io the United Sutas. This is the 
church with a centralized episcopal government 
nbieh has a large Enembership, and the efforts to 
■djust the races in this organization throw light c 
the problem in the whole country. 

There were in 1790, 11,682 Negro members ot 

this church; in 1800, 246,249 Negro members, and 
in 1906, 327,000. The color question in the church 
crapped out very early. In 1800 colored deacons 
were allowed; in 1844 the church split on the sla- 
very question and many Negro congregations in 
border states were left without pastors. They asked 
for colored ministers and conferences, and the 
colored ministers were authorized and a colored 
annua] conference was established in 1852. In 1856 
and 1866 two Negro bishops were sent to Africa. 
In 1864 colored annual conferences were recognised 
and raised to full powen, and N^ro bishops sat aa 

Hecro STMiceliMttlon 


delegates iii the general conference of 18(i8. From 
1872 to the present there has l)een an uii- 
granted demand for a Negro bishop, bul Negro 
general officers have been elected and u third 
N<^ro bishop to Africa. From Uiis church there 
have been two HCcesHions on account of color dis- 

Atrican Methodiat Episcopal Church (see Meth- 
odists, IV., 6); (!trtain Negroes seceded from the 
Methodist Cliurch in Philadelphia in 1787 Bn<l 
eventually formed Llie church which has grown as 





404. 7T7 




0.1 KM (?) 

It had in |{K]3, nine unci a half million dollars' 
worth of properly and thirteen bishops. It rai^s 
»1,000,000 a year. 

African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church (see 
Methodists, IV., 7): A second secession from the 
Methodists took phice in New York in 1796. The 
growth of the Zion Methodists has been us follows: 

1 Minulen 


agi::;::::::::::::::::::::: ■ ™- 



The Colored Methodist Epis=op;i! Church (see 
Mbthocihts, IV., 8): This church, consialing of 
Negro members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
Soutli, set aiiide in IiS60, has grown us follows: 







Its property was reported in 1906 as 31,715,560. 

b. Baptlata (see Baptists, II., 3, { 10): Most of 
the early colored Baptist churches were identified 
with white churches, and in churches of mixed 
membership the whiles were often in the minority. 
In the mixed churches of this period, the colored 
members had no voice in ufTaira except in the recep- 
tion and discipline of members of their own race. 
After the emancipation of slnves, the Negro Bap- 
tists of the Southern States very generally separated 
from the w*hite churches, aud organized churches 










2JI . :2 

Between 1890 and 1906 the value of property in- 
creased from (9,173,176 to 124,733,811. 

The growth of tlie other denominations can be 
seen in the tables given above. The Roman Catho- 
lics, whose efforts were checked a while by the racial 
question, have been making especial effort in the 
last two decades and have doubled tlieir member- 
ship in sixteen years. The Episcopalians show a 
large increase duo to recently renewed efforts, whila 
the Presbyterians and Congregationalists have 
grown more slowly. W. E. B. DuBois. 

BiBUooRAraT: Veni Sieg, Tki Nvro Prablm. A BMiof 
rapliu. Uadinn, Wia.. 1900: C. C. Joan, Ri^ioioat /lulrw- 
lun of lilt Nrgroti ofUie L'niUd Slairt, Suvaanah, 1S42; L 
G. Penn and J. W. E. BDwon, Tht Urtittd Nrora. Atluta, 
1903; AUanla Vnirtrnlii PuUiOUiani. Nog. B. 8. 13. AV 
luita. 1902 sqq.; W. B. Puka. Pauibilitia of Vw Nttra, 
Atliuitu, 1904; M. A. Amea. Fnnn a Nrm Eneiand fFinnm't 
Diary in Dixit in ISes. Spmufielil. Man.. 1006; H. P. 
Ejutmui. Tht Nmn>, Ai'i OruVn, Hialom and tlalxnti, 
Bosinn, 19(16; J, H. Jaqkwn. Hi*, a! Kdumiian fron l*t 
OriAit U Iht PrrMtnl Timt. 2d ed.. Colorado. IWIC: S. N. 
Vos, The ProBTttief tilt Negro Ract, lUleigh, K.C., 19061 
R. E. Dennett, At Hit Bnck «! On BXaek Man', Mind. 
Naw York, 1907; J. A. Pri«. Th* Nton: Piut, PrttaU 
□nd Fiifurc WuhinglAn. IU07-. B. T. Wuhinittm ud 
W. E. B. Dn Bois, Nturo in Iht Saiilli. Fbilmtdphis. 1907; 
J. Dowd, The Nram Raeit. A KinolaBirai Sludv, vol. i.. 
New Yurli, ISOT; A. H. Stsne. Sludia in Ut Amcrion 
RaCB Pnbltm. ib. I90S: B. T. Wuhinstoa, Tht SIcrv ef 
1A> Nearti; tie Rite of the Race from Slaorry, 2 vola.. lb,, 
1009; W. Archf-r. Thnnmh Afro-America. An £>wtM 
Rtading of Vit Ract Froblem, Laodon, 1910. 


Hin linciws (I 1>. 

Ilia (:ciiDinl«iuti nod Its PurpoK (} 2). 
cmnl Oppwiitu 

HiB A 


;i- (1 * 

Postrcjtilic Jewish patriot and governor. Ac- 
cording to Neh. viii. 9, xii. 26, he bore the titles of 
tirahaiha and pebah (governor), the first of which is 
probably a Persian title given to royal commission- 
era, and the second is in origin Babylonian. The 
inference of the Syriac and Arabic translators from 
the title tirshatha and from Neh. x. 9 that Haculi^h 
and hia son were priests is unfounded, the worda 
" these were the priests " (verse 8) not referring to 
the opening verse, and quit« opposed to such an 
oflicc is tlie passage Neh. vi. 11. More 
I. His probable is the very early and persist- 

Lineage. cnt tradition that Nebemiah was of the 
family of David. This is supported by 
the fact that he calls Jerusalem " the place of my 
fathers' sepulcbera " (ii. 3, H) and agrees with Iho 
known likinj; of Persian kings to have about them 
the descendant.^ of royal families (Dan. i. 3). Ac- 
cordant also with this supposition is the confession 
in i. 6-7. 



Nesrro Eyanffellsation 

It was in the month Chisleu of the twentieth year 
of Artaxeixes I. Longimanus (445 B.C.) that 
Nehemiah first heard directly from Jerusalem of the 
pitiful condition at the capital, of the breaches in the 
wall, and the burning of the gates. The sadness in- 
duced by these tidings manifested itself in his coun- 
tenance and came to the notice of the king as he 
exercised his office of cupbearer. The latter asked 
for an explanation, which brought to the king's ear 
the cause of Nehemiah's sorrow, and gave to the latter 
opportunity to ask to be sent home with the com- 
mission to build the walls of Jerusalem (Neh. ii. 5). 
That the mission was an extraordinary one is shown 
by the appointment of a definite time for his re- 
turn (iL 6), and the circumstances of his return to 
the king twelve years later imply that during that 
time the king appointed him to the permanent office 
of governor. Furnished with a letter of safe-con- 
duet to the governors of the region beyond the 
Euphrates and with orders to take from 
2. His the king's forest the necessary mate- 
Commission rials for repair of the gates and walls, 

and Its and provided with orders that an offi- 

Porpooe. cial residence be furnished him, and 
also with an official escort, he arrived 
at Jerusalem (Neh. ii. 7-12). After three days' res- 
idence, he made a visit by night to the wall and 
gates of the city and observed the conditions. He 
then made an appeal to the national pride of the 
Jews and succeeded in stirring them up to the work 
of reconstruction, showing them the authority which 
he had from the king to accomplish the work. The 
zcxd, cleverness, and energy of the man are suffi- 
ciently revealed by the account of the work and by 
the shortness of the time in which Jerusalem became 
again a fortified city. The work of construction 
was done by the community under the leadership 
of the principal people, associations, and gilds within 
fifty-two days. The result was intense disappoint- 
ment to the enemies of the Jews (Neh. vi. 15), and 
great thankfulness on the part of Nehemiah for the 
accomplishment of his plan and for the triiunph 
over hindrances both external and internal. 

Nehemiah was aware from the first that the ac- 
complishment of his purpose would go contrary to 
the political plans of the enemies of his people. 
These at first charged the Jews with harboring re- 
bellious intentions (ii. 20), went on to the use of 
insult and mockery (iv. 1-3), and finally prepared 
for actual hostilities, a plan foiled by the military 
readiness and foresightedness of Nehemiah. They 
went on to treacherous attempts to lure Nehemiah 
outside the walls that they might seize him, and at- 
tempted to compromise him by inducing him to in- 
vade as for personal security the tem- 
j. External pie area (vi. 2 sqq., 10). Especially 
and noteworthy among the active enemies 

Internal were three men, Sanballat, Tobiah, and 
Oppo6ttk>n. Geshem. Geshem doubtless had at 
heart the interests of the settlers in the 
south and southwest of Judea; Tobiah was related 
to some of the first families of the land and had 
a strong following among them; while Sanballat 
(called "the Horonite," ii. 10, 19) enjoyed the 
authority and prestige of the position of priest at 
Somflrin a position which possibly was a conse- 

quence of the event narrated in II Kings xvii. 28. 
The internal hindrances Nehemiah had to combat 
were despondency arising from the nature of the 
work, the rumors of attacks in force by the neigh- 
boring people (iv. 10, 12), and the hard economic 
conditions of the country (v. 1-8). The first obstacle 
was overcome by Nehemiah's encoiu'agement and 
leadership and example, the last by inducing the vol- 
untary release by creditors of the conditions which 
made life so hard for the poor. Besides the fore- 
going hindrances is to be mentioned the fact that 
while part of the people were tractable, another part 
wished to maintain their relations with the foes 
on the outside, and assisted in the carrying out of 
plots against the leader (vi. 9-14, 17-19), even to 
the procuring of false prophecy. 

When the honor of the city was restored by the 
completion of the walls, Nehemiah turned to the 
maintenance of that position. The city was half 
depopulated, and that condition had to be altered, 
but in accordance ^ith legal and moral rights. To 
that end a search of the records and a census were 
ordered (vii. 4-5). The latter process was a lengthy 
one, and it is possible that to carry this through 
Nehemiah sought the office of governor. The former 
was accomplished by the casting of lots and the 
bringing of one out of ten to dwell in 
4. His the city (xi. 1-2), the " princes of the 
Achieve- people " taking up their residence 
ments and there. The narrative of events is some- 
Character, what confused under the editing which 
the memoirs of Nehemiah have under- 
gone. It is not improbable that the great feast de- 
tailed in chaps, viii.-x. took place in the year 444 
B.C., while the consecration of the wall fell in the 
year 430 B.C., after the return of the governor from 
the king. Other accomplishments were the purify- 
ing of the temple by the exclusion of those unlaw- 
fully domiciled therein (xiii. 4-9, 28), provision was 
made for the orderly conduct and maintenance of the 
public service, and enforcement of the law against 
intermarriage with the heathen (xiii. 10, 23). The 
accomplishments of Nehemiah which are worthy of 
note then are the awakening of the sense of nar 
tional honor and of regard for the law, and the re- 
establishment of Jerusalem as the capital of the 
country and the rallying-point of the community. 
While Ezra brought together the Jewish commu- 
nities of the diaspora and the homeland under the 
dominion of the law, Nehemiah brought about " the 
national-political organization as the amphictyony 
of the holy state.'' His character appears as that of 
a man with a lively sense of honor and distinction. 
He was true to his family, to the God of Israel, and 
to his duty to his people. He used his high rank, 
his official position, and his powers in the service he 
had undertaken, the purpose of which was to pre- 
serve the glory of God and to further the welfare 
of his nation. He permitted no opposition to stand 
in the way of this service, and employed his own 
means i^ith great liberality. His first concern was 
to keep a good conscience toward God, and the 
memoirs which he left are a testimony to the hon- 
esty of his purposes and the diligence and discretion 
with which he carried them out. II Mace. ii. 13 
attributes to Nehemiah also the creation of a libraiy 


■nd collection of hiaUiricai archivea and sacred 
books, and by tradition the formation of the third 
part of the canon is practically traced to him. 

(A, Klostehmann,) 

Bibuourafiit: Consutt, beniila tbe literature under EtEU 

AND Nehehiah, Boom of, F. RioHlnr. iu BMirhe Ztii- 

acAK/1. ! (IWH). Z32-24fi, ii (]0(I4>, lS-271 DB. iii. 507- 

610: Bfl, iu. 3380-S7; JE, ii. 208-211; Vijounim, flit- 

REIL, CHARLES: Churrh of England; b. in 
London Muy 14, 1841. He graduated from Trinity 
Hal!, Cambridge {B.A., 1862; M.A., 186(1); ho ivas 
ordained deacon IS65, and prieat 1806; became 
curate of Bradford Abbaa, near Sherborne, Dorset, 
1885; vicar of St. Paul's, Bethnal Green, 1806; in- 
cumbent of St. Matthias, Poplar, London, 1875; 
»nd vicur of St. Mary's, Stamford Brook, London, 
1899. He waa called to the bar (Inner Temple) in 
1884; and has been joint editor of the Clergyman's 
MagadrK, London, 1876 sqq. He is the author of 
the volume on Romans, in the Expositor's Com- 
mentary (London, 1877); the volumes on Genesis, 
the Gospels, and Acts, in the Teacher's Catechimng 
Bible (1893-04); The FaUacy of Stwramental Con- 
fession; DisaniTses Delivered at St. MaUkias, Pop- 
lar (ItW); and contributed the volume on the Paul- 
ine epistles to The Biblical Elucidator (1896). He 
edited John Todd'a Indez Rerum (London, 1881); 
with H. D. M. Spence and J. S. ExeU he edited 
Thirty Thousand Thoughts ([1883] sqq.); and, with 
C. H, H. Wright, A Proleslant Dictionary (IWM). 

cator; b. at Mount Pleasant, near Brantford, 
Canada, Oct. 17, 182,1; d. atCobourg, Canada, Oct. 
17, 1887. He received hia education at Lewiston 
Academy, N. Y., Genesee Wesley an Seminary, 
N. Y., Victoria College, Cobourg, Canada, and Wes- 
leyan UniverBity, Conn. (B.A., 1846); after teach- 
ing for a year he entered the ministry, serving as 
pastor at Port Hope, Toronto, and at London, Can- 
ada; in 1850 he tiecnmo president of Victoria Col- 
lege, and held the position till his death. See Meth- 
odists, IV., 10, S 3. 

Episcopal bishop of Georgia; b. at Greenwood, near 
Cobham Station, Va., May 23, 1852. He waa 
educated at St. John's College, Amiapolis, Md. 
(B.A., 1872) and attended lectures at the Berkeley 
Divinity School, Middletown, Conn., from which, 
however, he was not graduated. He was ordered 
deacon in 1876 and ordained priest in the following 
year, after which iie was rector of St. John the Bap- 
tist's, Germantown, Pa., from 1876 to 1883, and of 
the Chwrch of the Nativity, South Bethlehem, Pa., 
from 1882 to 1802, when he was consecrated bishop 
of Georgia.*rHT: W. S. Pcrty, Tht Epiicojialt in America, p. 
337, New York, IB05, 

HELSOM, DAVID: Presbyterian; b, near Jones- 
borough, Tenn., Sept. 24, 1793; d. at Oakland, 111., 
Oct. 17, 1844. He was graduated at Washington 
College, Virginia, in 1810. He practised medicine, 
imbibed infidel opinions, but was converted, and 
licensed to preach in 1825. After five years' service 
in Teoneasee and Kentucl^, he eatabliahed Marion 

College in Mismuri, and was its first president, 
holding lite position for six years; but hia aboli- 
tionist vien's at lost forced his departure, and in 
1838 he opened at Oakland, 111., a training-acbool, 
partictdarly for missionaries. He wrote Cause and 
Cure of Infidelity {New York, 1836), often reprinted 
and edited, while it exists in translation in French, 
German, and Spanish. 

HELSOS, HESSY ADDBOIT: Presbyterian; b. 

at Amherst, Mass., Oct. 31, 1820; d. at St. Louis, 
Mo., Dec. 31, 1906. He was educated at Hamilton 
College, Clinton. N. Y. (A.B,. 1840), after which be 
taught at Eaton, N. Y., and Homer, N. Y., tmtil 
1843, when he entered Auburn Theological Semi- 
nary, from which he was graduated in 1&46. He 
was then pastor at tlie FirBt Presbyterian Church, 
Auburn, N. Y. (1846-56), and at the First Presby- 
terian Church, St. Louis, Mo. (1856-68), professor of 
systematic and pastoral theology at Lane Theologi- 
cal Seminary, Cincinnati (1868-74), pastor of the 
First Presbyterian Church at Geneva, N. Y. (1874- 
1885), and acting pastor at Independence, Mo. 
(1885-86). From 1886 until his retirement from 
active life in 1897 he was editor of The ChurcA at 
//oinearuf.lbroaif (Philadelphia). He was a member 
of the joint comnutl«e of thirty appointed by the 
general assemblies of the northern and southern 
branches of his denomination in 18G8 to effect their 
reunion, and in theology " accepted tbe standards 
of the Presbyterian Church, but would much prefer 
a fair statement of the consensus in doctrine of all 
tbe churches which acknowledge each other as 
evangelicals, eliminating all the dogmas which dis- 
tinguish them from each other." Hia works in- 
clude: Seeing Jesus (Philadelphia, 1869); Sin and 
Sab-alion (New York, 1881); and Home Whimpers 
(PbUadelphia, 1885). 

HELSOH, RICHARD HEHHy: Protaatant Epis- 
copal bishop coadjutor ot Albany, N. Y.; b. in 
New York ITity Nov. 10, 1859. He was educated 
at Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (A.B., 1880), 
lie University of Leipsic (1880-81), and Berkeley 
Divinity School, Middletown, Conn., from which 
be waa graduated in 1883, After being curate of 
St. John's, Stamford, Conn. (1883-84), he was 
rector successively of Grace Church, Waterville, 
N. Y. (1884-87), Christ Church, Norwich, Conn. 
(1887-97), and St. Peter's, Philadelphia. Pa. (1807- 
1904). In 1904 he waa consecrated bishop coad- 
jutor of Albany, N. Y. 

■mI'ei-UB, OF EMESA: Bishop ot 
Emesa in Phenicia in the fourth century. Of hit 
life nothing whatsoever is known, nor was his work, 
generally known as " On the Nature of Man " (ed. 
I. Casaubon, Antwerp, 156S; ed. J. Fell, Oxford, 
1671; best ed. by Matthai, Halle, 1802; with col- 
lected prefaces also in MPG, xl.; Eng. transl. by 
G. Wither, London, 1636), mentioned before Maxi- 
muB Confessor in the seventh century. The date ot 
the work rests entirely on internal evidence, aa in 
its polemics against Apollinarius and Eunomius. 
and in its evident alliLsions to Antiochene Chris- 
tolagy. On the other hand, there is no allusion to 
controversies later than the fourth century, such as 



Gotychunism and Neatarianism, or to the dyophy- 
ntk problem. The work is & noteworthy endeavor 
to make & ChHslian philosophical compend of an- 
thnqmlogy. Puul and Moses are equated with 
Meninder and Aristotle, and the influence of GoJen 
ii also marked. The highest proof o( divine provi- 
denee and of the exalted destiny of man ia baaeif 
•DO the incumatioD; lofty pndse ia accorded the 
imitjr and harmony of the entire creation, while, on 
the other hand, redemption ia robbed of ila value 
M a historical fact. The book shows how atronf; 
and complete was the blending of Christianity and 
Belleaism in the fourth century. It was much 
Ined and highly cateemed until the RenaiasaDce, 
and vas translated into Latin by Alfanus in the 
rievcQth century (ed. Holzinger, Prague, 1887) 
and in the twelfth century by Burguudio of Pisa 
(ed. Buikhardt, Meidlinger, lSgi~9S), as well as 
by the Humanisla Kono and Valla. An Italian 
Version appeared in 1509 and an Old Armenian 
tnnslation was alao nmde. (R. Schuid.) 

BnuocBAniT: M. EvDoeeliilGH, UrmaiuM und trinr QurUen, 
Berlin. 1S»3; Bonder. Unlrrimdiinii iibrr Nrmcn^u. Hd- 
delbeiK. 1S9S^ B. Doauuuki. Dir Pti/c/ioUiaii dn Ntmttiiu, 
in BnlriiK rw OncAicAf f dn MiOrlattrrs. vol. iii., MQnatnr, 
leOOi CriUier. AuHuri tacrU. n. 2S3-2S5: DCB. iv. IB. 

HKHHIUS; The traditional author of the HU- 
loria BHlonum, a work which purports to be a liis- 
lory of Britain to the Saiton eonoueat. It has little 
historical value and there is much dispute concern- 
ing its origin. It has been ascribed to Gildas, to an 
Irish bishop of the ninth century known as Mark 
the Hermit, and to an anonymous writer. The 
later investigators believe it to be a compilation of 
rarious datee, in which Neraiius may have taken 
part. If so, he is to be assigned to the close of the 
cdghth or first half of the ninth century and woa 
probably a monk of Wales, But informaliDn con- 
cerning him is lute and doubtful and the work itaelf 
offers little that is conclusive. The beat edition ia 
by T. Monunaen in Chronica minora, iii. {MGH, 
Atitt.ara., xiii. 1898), Eng. traaal. by J. A. Gilea 
(London, I84I, and in Bohn'a An^iifunriaR Li- 
BiBUOiuiPBr: C. W. Scholt. De ea/niojiiK-a Brilonian 

Satanaiutae hutoria /onttiiu. Berlin. IMl ; W. F. Skene. 

Tk€ Four Annenl Boaii d/ Walet, i. 37-41, Edinburgh. 

laaS: A. de U Bonlerie. Slwira hUtnriqva bnto7inr$; 

rikiitoria BrUonum aUrititi/f i iVmniut. Poiis. IS83: H. 

Zimmrr. JVmnw i-indinUiu, Berlin. 1R93: idem, in ,V^. 

lix (ISM). 43e-14:t; the prcTice to Mommsen's edition. 

Dt.aiip.; R-Tharaeyten, in ZnlHJirifl jQrdridKJiiTktolinrif. 

DviU (IS05). SO-m: p. Lot. in U Moatn Jai. viii (1^95). 

177-lM, U <l89fll. 25-38: DNB. ±t. 217-221. 

HEOPHYTES (ROVICES): A term applied in 
the eariy Church to newly baptized Christiana 
(I Tim. iii. 6). It was used especially during the 
■" H'eek of the neophytes," during which the newly 
baptized wore the white baptismal garments; it 
designated also the younger members of the con- 
gregation, and where a regular annual season For 
baptism was obseired the members baptited dur- 
inf; the last year seemed to have been termed neo- 
phytes. The "apostolic rule" (I Tim. iii. 6) that 
no nei^hyte could be a bishop is frequently re- 
peated, and in the Eecond Nicene canon of 325 this 
prohibition is made to include the priestly office. 
The rule waa frequently violaled, or at least con- 

sidered capable of suapenaion, so that laymen were 
repeatedly chosen biahope, and Ambrose (q.v,) and 
Syneaius (q.v.) were not even bapti/ed when elected 
to the episcopate. lu the East the rule was milder, 
Justinian enacting that a layman should be in orders 
at least three months before being n)ade bishop 
(.VowUd, cwdii. 1). ("H. AcHEUB.) 


I. Character and Origjn. 
II. TliB System oT Plotinus. 

rtoetiioe of the " One " (| 1). 
Thq World.Soul (I 21. 
Religion and Elhiia ({ 3). 
III. Fiirthor Development of Neoplstontom. 
Porphyry (i 1). 
JamblichuB and Others ([ 2). 
The Atheniui School (( 3). 

I. Character and Origin; Neoplatoniam is the 
last development of Greek philosophy, in which 
the mind of antiquity, using many elements of the 
older systems, especially the PlBtonic, passed be- 
yond the realistic tendenciea of the Stoics and Epi- 
cureans, dogmatically conquered skepticism, and 
rose to a height of mystic speculntion which was 
influenced partially by Oriental and ('hristion ideas. 
Thia speculation was directed principally upon the 
Godhead and the relation to it of mankind and the 
universe, though physics, ethics, and logic were not 
wholly neglected. The thcosophic-mystical tend- 
ency which is apparent in Plato is reaponsible tor 
a desertion, to a certain extent, of the path of sci- 
entific strictness of reasoning followed by tlie older 
Greek philoaophera. In the historical development 
the Neoplatonials follow immediately upon the 
Neopythi^oreans and the Pythagorean izing or 
eclectic Platonials; but the Ncoplntoniat school had 
much more that was original and independent than 
the school which preceded it, bringing the sum total 
of knowledge into a new philoso|)hic system. As a 
definite school, it originated in Alexandria, where 
the mixture of nationalities made for a fusion of 
earlier philosophic and religious tendenciea. Ila 
founder was Ammonius Saccaa (q.v.), who had been 
brought up a Christian and had then returned to 
Hellenism. He left no written remains, and it is 
thus difficult to determine his exact relation to his 
succesaors. Among his pupils were Plotinus, the 
two Origetis (the Neoplatonist and the Chriatian), 
and Longiaua the critic. When Neoplatonism is 
mentioned in a general way, it coimotea mainly the 
teaching of Plotinus (b. at Lycopolia, in Upper 
Egypt, 204; d. at Campania 270), After studying 
under Ammonius for some ten years he accompa- 
nied the Emperor Gordian in his campaign againat 
the Persiana, in order to learn something of their 
philosophy. In 244 he went to Rome and won 
numerous adherents to his teaching, among them 
the Emperor Gollienus and his wife Sidonina. He 
taught here till about 268, retiring then to the 
country estate of a disciple in Campania. He did 
not reduce his doctrine to writing until toward the 
close of hie Ufe, and then did not publish it, leaving 
this to be done by his pupil Porphyry, who ar- 
ranged the fifty-four treatises of the master in six 
Enneadea, placing them in logical order from the 
simplest to the most abstruse — although he also 
gives their chronological aequence. They weio first 




printed in a Latin translation by Marsilio Ficino at 
Florence in 1492, then in Greek and Latin at Basel, 

IL The System of Plotinus: What principally 
distinguishes Plotinus from both Plato and his im- 
mediate predecessors is the assumption of a princi- 
ple higher than the nous. This assump- 
I. Doctrine tion proceeds from the requirement of 
of the unity as an attribute of the highest 
"One." principle; the rums, as at once subject 
and object of perception, noaun and 
nooumenon, is twofold. Therefore something higher 
must be sought, which is absolute unity, the One, 
identical with the Godhead and wholly transcend- 
ent — the first cause, the source of all thinking and 
being, all the good and beautiful, and all activity. 
The utter transcendence of God being thus taught 
by Plotinus in a more extreme form than by any 
of his predecessors, he admits the insolubility by 
human reason of the most difficult of all metaphys- 
ical problems — how becoming arose out of immuta- 
ble being and plurality out of unity. The theory 
of Emanation (q.v.), which he accepts, does not 
answer the question; but, following Plato, he sug- 
gests that the explanation may be found in the 
goodness or benevolence of God. All other beings 
produce yet others; and how should the most per- 
fect of all beings, the primal goodness and the high- 
est power, remain absorbed in itself as though im- 
potent to produce? This, of course, is rather an 
anthropomorphic-ethical than a metaphysical ex- 
planation; an attempt to supply the latter is found 
in the view that the highest being is over-full, and, 
as the higher, does not precisely contain the lower 
in itself but allows it to flow forth from its super- 
abundant perfection. This doctrine may possibly 
show oriental influence; but the idea of emanation 
occurs in the Stoic teaching, and still more in Philo, 
though in neither so fully developed as with Plotinus. 
That w^hich first issues from the One is the rums, 
which is conscious of being a product and image of 
the One and receives from its relation 
2. The to the One its power to produce other 
World- existences. It is not mere thought but 
SouL actual being, comprehending all things 
as the genus comprehends the species. 
It contains the ideas, contrary to the teaching of 
Plato, who conceived it as being contained in one 
of them, that of good. Another difference is that 
whereas Plato asserted the existence of ideas only 
for such objects as had a common concept or name, 
Plotinus attributes them to all single existences. 
From the nous proceeds further the soul, the third 
principle. As the highest principle has neither 
thought nor consciousness, so the nous, which is 
purely contemplative, has no reflective, logical 
thought. This is the work of the world-soul, w^hich 
is the link between the intelligible and the phe- 
nomenal world, carrying on the process of emana- 
tion down to its lowest terms. Matter is conceived 
by Plotinus not exactly as an emanation from the 
world-soul, but rather (as with Plato) in the guise 
of a receptive or passive principle in contrast to 
the formative or active. What the world-soul sees 
in the nouSj with that it is pervaded and that it 
strives to reproduce. The content of the soul de- 

scends to lower stages. This content is composed 
of the ideas; and thus in the image of the nmu and 
soul images of the ideas are also contained. These 
are the logoi, concepts, whose sum, the Loff09 par 
excellence, like the worid-soul itself, is an emana- 
tion from the rume. These logoi are the essential 
factor in the giving of form to matter, which is 
formed in an organic, not a mechanical, manner. 
This formative process presupposes purpose, but 
not knowledge or deliberation — just as in Heracli- 
tus all becoming takes place on rational principles, 
yet without any conscious foresight. If everything, 
therefore, is formed and pervaded by rational 
powers, the world-soul with its content permeating 
all, all must be rational or reason. Although the 
logoi are lower than their protot3rpe8, and their re- 
lations with formless matter go lower still, jret Plo- 
tinus finds in the world of phenomena traces of the 
highest; the absolutely Good and Beautiful is visi- 
ble even in the world of sense. The spirit of Plato, 
as expressed in the close of the TinuBus, the idea 
that the sensible world is a great and beautiful and 
perfect thing, dominates Plotinus also, so that in 
spite of matter producing evil, he is far from re- 
garding this world as evil or hateful, representing 
rather in this point the general optimism of Greek 
philosophy than the tendency of the early Christian 
writers to despise the visible world. On the whole, 
in his explanation of the existence of evil in the 
universe and his justification of the higher powers 
in respect to it, he follows the Stoics. 

From the world-soul proceed individual souls, 
but they are not parts of it. Going down into 

bodies, they have foi^gotten the higher, 

3. Religion the divine, from which they came, and 

and have believed themselves independent; 

Ethics, thus they have gone continually lower, 

and stand in need of a return to 
the better; but Plotinus does not make it plain 
whether this can be executed with freedom by men. 
The ethical goal is sometimes represented, after 
Plato, as approximation to the Godhead, sometimes 
in a more Aristotelian fashion as operation in con- 
formity with the nature of the operator, and again, 
with Heraclitus and the Stoics, as obedience to rea- 
son. Among the virtues Plotinus distinguishes first 
the " political " or social, which are the four com- 
monly accepted by the Greeks — ^prudence, cour- 
age, temperance, and justice; but these can not 
make the soul like God. Above them are the puri- 
fying virtues, which have that effect. They consist 
in freeing oneself as far as possible from the body 
and from sin by an avoidance of what is sensual, 
though without any exaggerated asceticism. Man, 
however, is not to be satisfied by mere freedom 
from sin, but must strive actually to become God. 
To this end serve the deifying virtues, which are 
the reproduction on a higher plane of the primary 
or political virtues. Through these the true nature 
of man comes to its fulfilment; and thus his beati- 
tude consists in the maintenance of his proper atti- 
tude toward himself, undisturbed by external hap- 
penings or relations. The supreme aim, indeed, 
with Plotinus as with Philo, lies not in the realm of 
thought (as the detailed exposition of the deifying 
virtues might suggest), but in ecstatic elevation to 




the lu^iest good, to the Godhead. Logical knowl- 
edge is only a preliminary to this, which consists in 
immediate knowledge of and union with God. To 
this Plotinm himself, according to the testimony of 
Pdrphyiy, attained only four times in the six years 
that the disciple was with him. The reason why 
man on earth can not remain permanently in this 
state is that he has not yet succeeded in turning 
wholly away from the earthly; the time of perma- 
nent union will come when he is no longer tormented 
by any restlessness of the body. On the inunortal- 
ity ci the soul Plotinus wrote a separate treatise, 
in which he follows Plato in the main, especially 
emphasising the fact that the soul, as incorporeal 
and incompodte, is inci^able of dissolution. A re- 
union of soul and body in the higher life is incon- 
ceivaUe to him, since the passage into this higher 
life u conditioned by the desertion of the body, 
whose nature is in essential opposition to that of 

nL Farther Development of Neo-Platonism: 
Amrmg the disciplcs of Plotinus the most important 

was Porphyiy (q.v.; b. at Batanea, Sy- 
X. Poxphyry. ria, 233; d. in Romec. 304), the head of 

the Syrian school. He wrote lives of 
Plotinus and Psrthagoras, treatises De absUnenlia and 
De atUro nympharutn, a letter to Marcella, another 
De diia dttnumibua ad Anebonem, a brief compendium 
of the doctrines of Plotinus entitled Apharmai pros 
ta no&a, and an introduction to the " Categories " 
of Aristotle, besides a number of other works 
not now extant. The work last named is of consid- 
erable importance in the history of philosophy, as 
it contains the germ of the whole controversy be- 
tween realism and nominalism. The religious char- 
acter oi Porphyiy's philosophy is shown by his 
placing its aim in the ** saving of the soul.'' He 
mentions four kinds of virtues: the political, which 
make an ordinary good man; the purifying, which 
make him a " dsemonic " man; those which look 
up to the nau8, their cause, constituting the rational 
activity of the soul; and the virtue of the nous 
itself, the paradigmatic. Connected with the puri- 
fication on which he insists so strongly is the strict 
asceticism which he recommends, including ab- 
stinence from meat and from sexual intercoiu'se. 
He asserts that he has reached once, but only once, 
and that when he was sixty-eight, the height of his 
desire, being permitted to approach and to be united 
with the most high God. While he regarded the 
national religions as justifiable, making no distinc- 
tion between those of the Greeks and those of the 
barbarians, he opposed strongly the complete nov- 
dty of Christianity in his fifteen books " Against 
the Christians," which were totally destroyed by 
Theodoeius II. in 335. This work is an indication 
that the Neoplatonists felt the whole Hellenic sys- 
tem and their own position to be threatened by 
Christianity. It was considered of so much impor- 
tance that replies were published by Methodius and 
Eusebius of Ca^sarea among others. 

The sober character of Neoplatonism was lost in 
the soaring speculations of Jamblichus (b. in Coele- 
Syria c. 283; d. at Alexandria c. 330). In his belief 
in magic, miracles, and theurgy, or the art of com- 
pelling demons and other supernatural powers to 


produce desired results, he goes beyond all meas- 
ure. His miracle-seeking followers believed him a 
being of a superior order, and called 
2. Jambli- him " the Divine " or " Divinest." 
chus and Besides his principal work, the Syna* 

Others. gOgi tOn PythagoreiHn dogTnatOn, five 
others are extant, of which the most im- 
portant are the Vila Pythagorica and the AdhortaHo 
ad philoaophiam. The treatise De mysteriUf said to 
have been ascribed to him by Proclus, is certainly 
not his, but probably belongs to some member of 
his school. Jamblichus attempted to justify the 
whole polytheistic system, and added a still more 
absolutely primal and exalted One above the One 
of Plotinus. The lower powers are divided into a 
long series of hierarchies, described with a Pythag- 
orean fondness for exact numbers. With the whole 
theurgic system is connected the belief that images 
of the gods, whether fallen from heaven or made 
by men, partake of divinity and are capable of 
working miracles. The surest method for winning 
the divine protection is by prayer, which the gods 
can hear apart from any tangible medium. The 
return to the suprasensual world is made by means 
of the virtues, of which at first Jamblichus adopted 
the fourfold classification of Porphyry, afterward 
adding a fifth class, the priestly or simple virtues 
(simple as referring directly to the One), by which 
the soul rises to mystic union with the Supreme. 
Among the disciples of Jamblichus the most inde- 
pendent thinker was Theodorus of Asine. Others 
of the Syrian school were Dexippus, iEdesius of 
Cappadocia, who long conducted a flourishing school 
at Pei^gamum, Chrysanthius of Sardis, and Euna- 
pius, known by his biographies of philosophers and 
sophists. A singular combination of learning and 
attractiveness won wide renown for Hypatia (q.v.). 
Her disciple and admirer Synesius (q.v.) showed a 
great deal of Neoplatonist influence in his writings. 
The Athenian school was later in time than the 
Syrian, and devoted itself rather to scientific efforts, 
especially the exposition of Plato and 

3. The Aristotle. Its first leader was Plutareh 
Athenian of Athens, head of the school there 

SchooL until 433, who seems to have followed 
Plotinus closely. His successor was 
Syrianus (until about 450), who was succeeded in his 
turn by Proclus the Lycian. He remained the head 
of the school until his death in 485. His principal 
works are his commentaries on Plato (especially on 
the TimoBua and the Republic) , the Stoicfieiosia the- 
ologikS, and the Peri tis kata Platona theologian. 
He undoubtedly deserves the second place in im- 
portance among the Neoplatonists for breadth of 
knowledge and dialectical power and acuteness. He 
attempted like the later scholastics to reduce the 
entire philosophical tradition to a complete logical 
system. He regarded the Platonic writings in the 
light of a revelation, but paid much attention also 
to Homer and Hesiod, and had an unbounded rev- 
erence for Jamblichus, on whom, with Plotinus, he 
depends for a large part of his system. Of less im- 
portance are his successors at Athens, Marinus, 
Zenodotus, Isidore of Alexandria, Hegias, and 
Damascius. In 529 the teaching of philosophy at 
Athens was suppressed by Justinian and the prop- 





erty of the school confiscated. Two years later, 
Damascius, with Simplicius, the well-known com- 
mentator on Aristotle, and five other Neoplatonists, 
went to Persia in the hope of finding in King Chos- 
roes a friend of philosophy, but were grievously dis- 
appointed and returned to Athens in 533. From 
this time on the efforts of those who were interested 
in such matters tended more and more to limit 
themselves to the exposition of earlier philosophers, 
especially Plato and Aristotle. 

The final dissolution of Neoplatonism was due 
partly to its unbounded recklessness of specula- 
tion and partly to the moral and religious force of 
Christianity, which borrowed what was most val- 
uable of the Neoplatonist system and breathed new 
life into it. Augustine, Dionysius the Areopagite, 
and Scotus Erigena (qq.v.) were particularly influ- 
enced by it, and through the two latter both the 
mystical and the pantheistic movements of the Mid- 
dle Ages received much of their direction. Neo- 
platonism had a marked revival at the Renaissance, 
especially through Marsilius Ficinus and Pico della 
Mirandola (qq.v.); and through Giordano Bruno 
(q.v.) in particular it has come down to modem 
times in one form or another, being discoverable 
by an acute analysis in the theories of SchcUing, 
Fichte, Hegel, and other leading nineteenth-cen- 
tury philosophers. (M. Heixze.) 

BiBUoaRAPHT: The subject is treated from three different 
standpoiats in three kinds of works: (1) in those on the 
history of philosophy such as: B. Erdmann, Eng. transl., 
London. 1893; W. Windelband, Eng. transls. of two 
works. New York, 1893, London, 1900; A. Weber. London, 
1806 (an excellent manual); F. Ueberweg, ed. M. Heinxe. 
vol. ii.. Berlin. 1905; (2) in the works on the church his- 
tory of the period; and (3) in works on the history of 
dogma. To these general works the student is therefore 
referred. For special treatment of the subject consult: 
C. Bigg, Neoplatonism, liondon, 1895; T. Whittaker, The 
Neo-PlalonUts, Cambridge, 1901; C. Elsee, Neoplatonism 
in Relation to Christianity, New York. 1908; K. P. Hasse, 
Von Plotin xu Goethe. Die Entuncklung des neuplatoni- 
schen Eiriheitsgedankens tur Weltanschauung der Neuseit, 
Leipsic. 1909; and cf. E. Zeller. History of Eclecticism, 
London. 1883. 

On the members of this school, for Plotinus consult: 
his Opera, cd. A. Kirchhoff, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1856, Eng. 
transl. of select works, by T. Taylor, London, 1794, 1834; 
of his De pvlchritudine, by T. Taylor, ib. 1787; Tvoo Books 
on the Essertce of Soul, and One on the Descent of Soul, by 
T. M. Johnson, Osceola, Mo., 1880; i^ections from the 
*' Ennoads " in Germ, transl. by O. Kieser, 2 vols., Jena, 
1905. Consult: J. Simon, Hist, de Vicole d'Alcxandrie, 
2 vols., Paris, 1846; A. Daunas, Plotin et sa doctrine, ib. 
1848; C. H. Kirchner, Die Philosophic des Plotin, Halle. 
1854; A. Kichter, Neuplatonische Studien, 5 parts, Halle, 
1864-67; M. Heinze, Die Lehre vom Logon, pp. 306-329, 
Leipsic, 1872; H. von Kleist, Plotinische Studien, Heidel- 
berg, 188.3; H. F. Mailer, Dispositionen xu den drei ersten 
Ennraden des Plotin, Bremen, 1883; A. Lang, Lessons on 
/.i<«-a/ttr«, pp. 92-101, London, 1»89; K. S. Guthrie, The 
Philosophy of Plotinus, Philadelphia, 1896; O. Gollwitzer, 
Plolins Lehre von der WUlensfreiheU, Kempten, 1900; A. 
Drews, Plotin und der Untergang der antiken Weltansc?iau~ 
ung, Jena, 1907. For Porphyry: his Opera tria, ed. A. 
Nauck, Leipsic, 1860; Opuscula, ed. Nauck, ib. 1886; Eng. 
transl. of his select works by T. Taylor, Ixindon, 1823, of 
his work on abstinence by S. Hibberd, ib. 1851, and of his 
Bent<?nce9 by T. Davidson, in Journal of Speculative Phi- 
loftophy, iii (1869), 46-73; N. Bouillet, Porphyre: son 
rMe dans Vccole nSoplatoniciennc, Paris, 1864; M. Haupt, 
Marci Diaconi vita Porphyrii«, Berlin, 1875; A. J. Kleff- 
ner, Porphyrius der N cuplatoniker und Christenfeind, 
Paderbom, 1896. For Jamblichns: his De vUapyihago- 
rica, ed. under the direction of the St. Petersburg Academy, 
St. Petersburg, 1884; his Pe mysteriiSf ed. G. Parthey. 

Beriin, 1857. Eng. transl. by T. Taylor. Chiswiek, 1821; 
his Adhoriatio ad philosophiam, Lat. text ed. H. PiiteUi. 
Leipsic. 1888. the Gk. text ed. the same, ib. 1894; H. 
Dodwell, De fide et atate JambUthus, in his BxereUatitmes 
. . . de ataU Pythagort, London* 1704; J. Simon* ut sup., 
u. 187-265; E. Vaoherot. Hist, critique de FScoU dXUx- 
andrie, ii. 57-65. 126-146. Paris. 1846; 0. C. A. von 
Hariees. Das Buck von den tlgypHachen Mysterien, Mumch. 
1858; A. Wilden. JanMichos on the Mysteries, in The Pla- 
tonic, Aug., 1885-July, 1887. On Ammonius: the Aris- 
lotdis vita, ed. in Diogenis Laertii de , , . phUosopherum 
vitis, Gk. and Lat., Paris. 1850; Fragmente coneervis par 
Nemesius, ed. M. N. Bouillet in Les Bnneadea de Plotin, 
ib. 1857; L. J. Dehaut, Essai historique aur la vie el la 
doctrine d^Ammoniue Saecas, Brussels, 1836; £. E. 
Vacherot, ut sup.; E. Zeller. in Archiv far GesrhirMe 
der Philosophie, vii (1894), 295-312. Consult also the 
convenient compend PU^na opera omnia, Porphyrii Uber 
de vita Plotini cum Marsilii Ficini commentariie et ejus- 
dem interprelatione castigata, annotationem in unum Wman 
Plotini et in Porphyrium attitit Danid WyUenbach, apparor 
turn erUicum disposuit, indices concinnavit G. H. Moser, 
ad fldem codicum MSS. el in novts reoensionis modum Gresea 
Latinaque emendavit indices ezplevit, prolegomena introdvo" 
tiones, annotationes, ezplicandis rAus ac veritis itemque 
Nicephori Nathanaelie antitheticuim Adversus Plotinum et 
Dialogtun Graci scriptoris anonymi ineditwn de amma 
adieeit F. Creueer, 3 vols.. London, 1835. 

important of the replies evoked by the Formula of 
Concord. The brief enforced return of Heidelbeig 
to Lutheranism under the Elector Louia (157&-83) 
obliged the Reformed to flee to Neustadt, where 
they found themselves obliged to defend their beliefs 
against the Lutheran doctrines; Ursinus accordingly 
wrote, in their name, the Adnumitio (Neustadt, 
1581, found also in his Opera, vol. ii., Heidelberg, 
1612). Its twelve chapters contain a presentation 
of the Reformed doctrines, a refutation of the 
principles advanced in the Formula of Ck)ncord, 
and a critique of the Augsbuig Confession and 
Luther. The distinctive Reformed tenets discussed 
are Christology, conununion, and predestination. 
The two natures of Christ are declared to be both 
united and distinct, the personal union consisting 
** in the subsistence and constitution of substance 
of a single person.'' Fellowship with Christ in the 
communion is regarded as given only through faith, 
thus excluding all idea of the real presence. The 
treatment of predestination is chiefly a sharper def- 
inition of the views advanced more vaguely and in- 
correctly by the Lutherans. The Latin edition of 
the Admonilio was soon followed by one in German, 
and the work naturally called forth several refutar 
tions, especially by Selnecker, Chemnitz, and Timo- 
theus Kirchner, which were answered in the Examen 
recitalionum Nicolai Sdnecceri (1582) and the De- 
fensio admonitionis Neo^adiana canlra apologia 
Erfuriensia sophismala (1586). Throughout this 
period Neustadt was the Reformed center, and the 
place of publication of a number of the writings of 
the theologians of Anhalt and Bremen. 

(E. F. Kajil MCller.) 

Bibuoobapht: A. Sohweiser. Die protestantisehen Central- 
dogmen, i. 491 sqq., Zurich, 1854; R. Sudhoff, Olevianus 
und Urtnnus, pp. 432 sqq., Elberfeld. 1857; H. Heppe. 
Qeschichte des deutschen Protestantismus, iv. 277 sqq., Mar> 

burg. 1859. 

NEPOMUK. See John op Nepomuk. 

NEPOS, ni'pes: Egyptian bishop before the 
middle of the third century. He is known from the 





attadc by DionyBius ci Alexandria on his lost " Ref- 
utatioQ of the Allegorists " in the second book of 
the Peri Epangdidn, From this it is clear that the 
chiliastB in Arslnoe regarded the works of Nepos as 
inefngable proof of the future reign of Christ on 
earth and of the realistic interpretation of the 
Apocalypse. According to Gennadius (De ecde- 
tituUcis dogmatibua, Iv.), Nepos held that after the 
resurrectioQ of the righteous there would be through- 
out the millffnninm a woiid of the unconverted, 
iriiich would war upon the just at the expiration of 
the thousand years, only to be destroyed by God. 
Nepos was also a writer of hymns, and seems to 
have been an excellent exegete. His position rep- 
lesented the conflict between the eschatology of 
the early Church and the spiritualizing tendency of 
Origen; but the Nepotians mentioned by Fulgen- 
tius (MPG, Ixv. 709) were at most mere chiliasts, 
having no oiganic affiliations with the doctrines of 

Nepos. (N. BONWETBCH.) 

Bibliookapht: Eusebius, Hiat, ecel., VII., xziv.; Tille- 
motit» Mhnovrm, tv. 261 aqq.; C. W. F. Walch, HisUnie 
dtr KtiatrwuH, ii. 152-167. 11 vols.. Leipsic, 1762-85; 
DCB, £▼. 23: CeOlier, AuU%Kn Mcria, iL 404-405. 564-565. 

NERGALy ner'gol: The patron deity of the 
Babylonian city Cutha, forming from the As^jrrian 
period a political triad with Marduk of Babylon 
and Nebo of Bursippa. Nergal, who appears in the 
Aaqrrian lists of gods as Ne-uru-gal (" Lord of the 
Great Dwelling/' i.e., of the dead), was the divinity 
of the burning heat of the sun, then of war and the 
chase, ci disease (especially fever) and pestilence, 
and aibove all of the realm of tKe dead, of which his 
temple (yet undiscovered) was a copy. He was 
identified with the unlucky planet Saturn, but later 
was confused with Mars (cf . the Mandsean names 
Nirig and Nargil, ** Mars "; see MANDiEANs). As 
the god €3i the glowing sim Nergal was represented 
as a lion, a ^3rmbol of the sun common throughout 
eastern Asia, especially as during the dog-days the 
sun is in Leo. Neigal was known in Cyprus, Syria, 
and Sidon, the latter a center of his cult. 

The Babylonian and Assyrian cult of Nergal is 
mentioned in II Kings xvii. 30; and in Isa. xxxv. 
7 diarabh (R. V., " glowing sand '*) has been inter- 
preted as an allusion to Neigal, especially as a Baby- 
Ionian list of gods states that Nergal was called 
Sharrabu among the Amorites. Winckler (AUorieiv- 
talxKhe Forxhtingen, i. 293, Leipsic, 1893), reading 
nerffolim for mdhgaioth (R. V., ** army with ban- 
ners ") in Cant. vi. 4, 10, seeks to find here an allu- 
sion to Gemini, which was sacred to Nergal. The 
name of the deity occurs in the Old Testament as 
a component of the Babylonian Nergal-sharezer 
('* Netgal protect the king ") in Jer. xxxix. 3, 13. 
See Babylonia, IV., § 10, VII., 2, § 8. 

(Alfred Jeremias.) 

Bibuoohapat: Consult, besides the pertinent literature 
under 6abtx>onia: A. Jeremias, in W. H. Roscber, Aiu- 
fahtiichea Lexikcn der griechiMhen und rOmxKhen Mythol- 
ogies iii. 250-271, Leipsic. 1895; Schrader, KAT, pp. 412 
9Qq.; P. D. Chantepie de la Sauasaye, Lthihuch der Re- 
liffitnugeaehichie, i. 303-305, TQbingen, 1905. 


The founder of the Roman Catholic order of Ora- 
torians and his followers. The founder was bom 

at Florence, Italy, July 22, 1515, and died at Rome 
May 26, 1595. In early childhood he showed marked 

evidence of piety, and in 1533 he went 

Life and to Rome, where he studied with the 

Character Augustinians, at the same time prac- 

of the tising works of asceticism, mercy, and 

Founder, religious instruction. On May 23, 

1551, he was ordained to the priest- 
hood in the church of St. John Lateran, and took 
an active part in the confraternities and other or- 
ganizations evoked by the revival within the Ro- 
man Catholic Church for strengthening it and for 
saving the half- heathen populace in body and soul. 
He was one of the founders of the Confraternity of 
the Holy Trinity, designed primarily for the care 
of strangers and the convalescent poor. St. Philip 
gathered old and young, priests and laymen, to 
meditations held each evening, which, after 1556, 
crystallized into definite form. The meditations 
were held in the evening in an oratory, where prayer, 
readings from the Bible, the Church Fathers, and 
histories of martyrs alternated with catechizings and 
hymns set to music more popular in character than 
the Gregorian chant. No address was allowed to ex- 
ceed half an hour in length, and all rhetoric and casu- 
istry was excluded. From his apologetic lectures 
delivered here, Baronius formed the nucleus of his 
immortal Annales ecclesiasticif and from the music 
here sung the '' oratorio '' had its rise. The house 
of the community breathed a spirit of friendliness, 
joyfulness, and service, and several times a week 
the founder and his friends visited the hospitals to 
tend the sick, neglecting no menial tasks either 
there or in their own house. St. Philip was firmly 
convinced that a joyous demeanor was far more 
suited to win souls to Christian virtue than a mel- 
ancholy air. His apparent light-heartedness and 
sociability brought upon him the suspicion of more 
puritanical leaders of the Roman Catholic move- 
ment for reform, and he was accused before the 
cardinal vicar of Rome of seeking empty honors 
and striving for high-church offices under cover of 
his conferences. Ho bore With patience his suspen- 
sion from hearing confession and from preaching, 
and the charge that he contemplated establishing 
a new sect was abruptly ended by the sudden death 
of the cardinal vicar. The accusations were later 
renewed, though without disturbing his somewhat 
whimsical humor, in which ho seems to have sought 
to rebuke the pharisaical puritanism which held 
sway in Rome at the period. At the same time, he 
was capable of severe ascetic sternness, and it must 
be borne in mind that his biographers commonly 
ascribe his apparent levity to his humility and his 
determination to avoid all praise of men. He was 
thus curiously like the rigid Pope Sixtus V. (1585- 
1590), whose invincible humor likewise made a deep 
impression on the memoiy of the Roman people. 
Repeated efforts were made to induce St. Philip 
to accept the cardinal's hat, but in vain. Such was 
his influence, however, that when Clement VII. 
long refused to release Henry IV. of France from 
excommunication after his submission to the Church 
in 1593, St. Philip bade Baronius deny the pope 
absolution after his confession until he should grant 
it to Henry. Baronius obeyed in trembling, but 




the desired absolution was soon given to the king, 
thus accomplishing what had been impossible for 
the entire French episcopate. 

The Oratorians were confirmed by the pope in 
1575 and again in 1612. Ail members were equal, 
the brethren even having legislative and judicial 
power over the superior. Government was by ma- 
jority vote, and the members of the conununity 
were secular priests, bound by no vows, 
The Italian retaining their own property, and at 
Oratory, liberty to withdraw at any time. They 
paid a certain amount monthly for the 
maintenance of their house, receiving only room- 
rent free. Nevertheless, their " Institution " con- 
tained many strict rules, such as a triweekly scour- 
ging in memory of the scourging borne by Christ for 
man (see Flagellation; Flagellants); and the 
problems and cases of conscience considered at 
meals were designed especially for confessors. On 
the other hand, St. Philip wished his followers to 
restrict themselves to prayer, the administration 
of the sacrament, and preaching. He permitted 
the establishment of daughter houses un\%iliingly, 
but such institutions, once founded, were placed 
more or less under the jurisdiction of their respec- 
tive bishops, so that the Oratorians have no gen- 
eral, no convention of delegates, and no central 
organization. The oratories of Naples and Milan 
were founded by Tarucci in 1586, almost contem- 
porary with those at San Severino, Fermo, and 
Palermo, and these were quickly followed by others. 
Some years before his death, St. Philip resigned his 
place as superior to Baronius, though until his death 
he remained active as a confessor and in pastoral 
care, filled with the deepest humility to the last. 
In 1622 he was canonized. Among the distinguished 
members of the order which he founded were Ba- 
ronius and Re3maldus (d. 1671), the brothers Thomas 
and Francis Bozius (d. 1610 and 1635; the former 
the first to declare that Luther committed suicide 
and to recount the terrible deaths of (Ecolampadius, 
Butzer, Calvin, and others in his De signis ecdesice, 
Cologne, 1593), Antonius Gallonius (d. 1615; the 
author of the De sanctorum martyrum crucuUibua, 
Rome, 1594, and frequently), Giovanni Marciano, 
Andrea Gallandi (q. v. ; the editor of the celebrated 
BiMiotheca veterum patrum, 14 vols., Venice, 1765 
sqq.), and Cardinal Capecelatro (q.v.). The English 
Oratorians established in 1849 included F. W. Faber 
(q.v.) and Cardinal J. H. Newman (q.v.). 

A French oratory resembling the one founded by 
St. Philip was established at Paris in 1611 by Pierre 
de B^rulle, who was bom 1575, and died at Paris 
Oct., 1629. Ordained to the priesthood in 1599 and 
created cardinal by Urban VIII. in 
The French 1627, he designed his order primarily 
Oratory, to hear confessions and to give relig- 
ious instruction. The French Orato- 
rians were required to render to their respective 
bishops the same obedience as that given by the 
Jesuits to the pope, and the exaction of any mo- 
nastic vow was expressly forbidden. Of B6rulle's 
successors the first two (Condren (1629-41) and 
Bourgoing (1641-62) contributed most, both to 
extend the congregation and to develop it. It was 
far more centralized than the Italian branch and 

had both a convention of delegates and a general, 
who later received coadjutors. It gained the en- 
mity of the Jesuits, however, and later, after Jansen 
had invited Oratorians to settle in the Spanish 
Netheriands to teach strict Augustinlan doctrines 
of sin and grace, became involved in the fortunes 
of Jansenism, besides being suspected of Cartesian- 
ism. Nevertiieless, in 1760 the congregation pos- 
sessed seventy-three houses, fifty-eight in France, 
eleven in Holland, two in Venaiasin (a papal di»> 
trict in Provence), one in Savoy, and one in Li^ge, 
some of these being seminaries and others colleges 
(both in contradistinction to the Italian oiganiza- 
tion). So deeply did the French Oratorians resist 
the absolutism of Church and State in the eighteenth 
century, that at the outbreak of the Revolution 
some of them united with the nobler advocates of 
the upheaval. During the first half of the nine- 
teenth century the congregation was in abeyance, 
but with the beginning of tibe second half it revived 
under the leadership of P^t^tot (d. 1887) and com- 
menced to make progress toward its former standi 
ard of learning, its success being evinced by such 
Oratorians as Auguste Joseph Alphonse Gratiy 
(q.v.) and H. de Valroger. The English Oratorians, 
already mentioned above, received many accessions 
from the Tractarian movement, and as eariy as 1850 
had a house in each of the cities of Liverpool, 
London, and Birmingham. Here their oi^ganisation 
favored their increase, being more in harmony with 
English traditions than the majority of Roman Cath- 
olic orders. They have materially aided the progieas 
of Roman Catholicism in England, in part by their 
publication of the records of the Roman Catholic 
martyrs under the Tudors. (O. ZOcKLEBtO 

Bzbuoorapht: The VUm by A. GaUonio (Ital., Rome, 
1600, 1818; Lat., Mainx, 1602; Genn.. Mains, 1611) and 
G. Bamabei (Rome, 1622. 1703) are in ASB, May, vi 
460 sqq. Other lives are by: P. J. Baoci. Rome, 1622, 
1837, Germ, transl.. Regenaburg, 1850; P. Gu^rin, Lyons, 
1852; N. P. S. Wiseman, London, 1856; A. Capecelatro, 
2 vols., Milan, 1884, Ehig. transl., 2 vols., London, 1884; 
G. M. Zampini, Turin. 1884; C. Massini, Milan, 1894; 
Comtesse D'Estienne d'Orves, Paris, 1900; A. F. von 
Pechmann, Freiburg, 1900; F. Baaet, Albi, 1902; and 
Antrobus. St. Louis. 1903; and in KL, ix. 213 sqq. 

On the congregation consult: Heimbucher, OrtUn tind 
Konoregationen, iii. 413-424; I. Marciano, MemorUiatoriekt 
ddla Conoreg. ddC Oratorio, 5 vols., Naples, 1693-1703; C. 
A. de Villaroeo. Memorie degli acrittori FUippini, 2 vols., 
ib. 1837-42; A. Perraud, VOraUnre de France, Paris, 1865; 
J. de la Pasardi^re. VOratoire de St. Philippe de Neri, 
Draguignan, 1880. 

NERO: Roman emperor from 54 to 68 a.d.; b. 
at Antium (38 m. s. of Rome) Dec. 15, 37; d. near 
Rome June 9, 68. His name is associated with the 
first great persecution of the Christians known to 
history, and immediately connected with the con- 
flagration which swept over Rome for six days and 
nights, beginning with the night of July 19, 64. 
These events fall in the darkest period of Nero's 
life; and though it is uncertain how well founded 
were the popular suspicions and the direct accusa- 
tions of Roman historians that he deliberately 
caused the fire, there is much evidence, such as his 
policy for rebuilding and beautifying the city, for 
believing them. At all events, the conflagration 
was atoned for by the blood of the Christians to 
avert the suspicions of the people from himself, after 




an other attempts to appease the populace had 
failed. The precise reason why the Christians were 
eepeeially chosen as the victims is unclear. It is 
eertain, however, that it was not jealousy of the 
Emi»e88 Poppffia for the alleged Cluistian mistress 
of NerOy Acte, as Aub6 supposed; or a religious 
motive of making the Christians, as despising the 
Roman temples, an expiation for their destruction, 
as Renan held. Nor can Hilgenfeld's theory that 
the persecution was due to paganism's instinctive 
fear of its approaching doom be maintained, for 
Christianity was not yet regarded as in itself a 
"forbidden rdigion." It would seem, therefore, 
that a prime factor in the selection of the Christians 
was the popular hatred of Jews and of orientals in 
general, the Christians being involved because they 
were still regarded by the heathen as a Jewish sect. 
The situation was complicated, moreover, by the 
mesHJanic expectations of the Jews which led them 
to proclaim divine judgment on the heathen and to 
see such a visitation in the burning of the metrop- 
olis of the world. On the other hand, the Chris- 
tians, with their expectation of an inunediate sec- 
ond advent, lo<dced for the destruction of the world 
by fire (cf. Minucius Felix, OdaviuSf xi. 1; Rev. 
xviiL 9 sqq.); they thus afiforded a ready basis for 
the suspicion that they had kindled the conflagra- 
tion. The restriction of the accusation was not due 
to Jewish chaiges, as some have thought, but to the 
fact that, on the one hand, the Jewish population 
of Rome was so laige and that the Jews were al- 
ready intensely embittered against the Romans, 
and, on the other hand, that the Christians were 
regarded as the greatest fanatics and as guilty of 
grave vices, besides being the instigators of Jewish 
riots (cf. Suetonius, Claudius, xxv.). While the 
precise course of investigation is not absolutely 
certain, Tacitus (Annalea, xv. 44) seems to imply 
that certain Christians were first arrested, and that 
in consequence of their statements the Christians 
were seiwd and condenmed en nuissef their mere 
adherence to Christianity and their alleged hatred 
of all the rest of the human race being regarded as 
sufficient evidence of guilt, without proving their 
actual incendiaiy acts in every case. 

The execution of the Christians was made a fes- 
tival of the Roman populace. In Nero's gardens, 
the present Place of St. Peter's, some were cruci- 
fied or sewn in skins and torn by dogs, and others 
were rolled in pitch and burned at night as living 
torches. According to Tacitus, moreover, Nero him- 
self appeared as a charioteer at the circus games 
given in connection with these executions and 
mingled with the people; yet even so he was imable 
to avert the suspicion among the populace that the 
Christians were not being sacrificed to the public 
weal but to the cruelty of an individual. 

It is clear from Tacitus and Suetonius, notwith- 
standing the assertions of Orosius (vii. 7) and Sul- 
picius Severus (ii. 28), that the persecution was 
restricted to Rome; nor is the allusion to the mar- 
tyrdom of Antipas at Pergamus in Rev. ii. 13 
BuflScient evidence for a more general persecution. 
But though the actual scene of the Neronian per- 
secution was local, its effects were far-reaching. In 
the burning of the great metropolis and the bloody 

reaction of paganism against Christianity was seen 
the approaching end of the world, and this belief 
was confirmed by the events of the years follow- 
ing — the fall and death of Nero, the Jewish war, 
and the savage internecine strife for the throne of 
the Csesars. Nero's demoniac figure became inter- 
woven in the eschatolpgy of the time (cf. Rev. 
xviii.). Elscaping from his murderers, or, in an- 
other version, raised from the dead, he was to 
return as Antichrist to wage the last great war of 
annihilation against the followers of Christ, only to 
be crushed by the Messiah appearing in judgment. 

(Robert POhlmann.) 

Biblioobapht: £. T. Klette. Die ChrislenkaUuirophe unter 
Nero nach ihren Quellen, TObiocen, 1907; B. Aub^, in 
Comptee vendue de Vaaidhnie dee tn«crtp<ion«, 1866, pp. 
194 sqq.; idem, Hiel. dee pereeeuUone de Vtgliee^ p. 421, 
Paris, 1875; E. Renan, VAnUchritt, chaps, vi.-viii., 
Paris, 1873, Eng. tranal., London, 1889; T. Keim, Aue 
dem Urchrietenthitm, pp. 171-181, Zurich, 1878; idem, 
Rom und doe Chrietenthum, pp. 132 sqq., ib. 1881; Q. 
Uhlhom, Conflict of Chrietianity with Heathenienit pp. 241- 
250, New York, 1879; C. F. Arnold, Die nenmieche Chrie- 
tenverfolgung, Leipeic, 1888; A. C. McGiffert, Apoetolic 
Age, pp. 627 sqq.. New York. 1897; Schaff, ChrieUan 
Church, i. 376-390; Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ed. J. B. 
Bury, ii. 79 sqq.; articles in ZWT, by Hilgenfeld, xii 
(1869). 421 sqq.. xxx (1890), 223 sqq.. by Hildebrand, 
xvii (1874), 94 sqq.; and by E. ZeUer, xxxiv (1891), 357 
sqq.; and in general, works on the church history of the 
apostolic period and on the history of the Roman empire 

NERSES, ner'siz: The name of several Arme- 
nian prelates. 

1. Iferses L " The Great ": Armenian catholicos; 
b. of royal (Arsacidan) lineage — also a direct de- 
scendant of Gregory the Illiuninator (q.v.) — at Vag- 
harshabad (now a village near Echmiadzin) c. 310; 
d. after 381. He studied in Greece and returning 
became chamberlain of King Arshak. King and 
people united in urging him to renounce civil and 
military pursuits and honors and to assume the 
duties first of bishop (c. 364) and afterward of cath- 
olicos or patriarch (c. 366). He was active alike in 
combating heathenism, which still survived, and 
the more primitive forms of Christianity, which re- 
sisted the intrusion of Greek doctrine and practise. 
In the interest of the Church he founded schools 
and charitable institutions. He was sent as an am- 
bassador by King Arshak to the Emperor Valen- 
tinian I. and was able to restore amicable relations 
between these rulers. He failed in a similar em- 
bassy to the Emperor Valens, whose Arianism he 
disapproved, and was banished by him to a desert 
island, where he was obliged to remain until lib- 
erated by the Emperor Theodosius the Great (381), 
who recalled him to Constantinople and detained 
him for awhile to participate in the second ecumen- 
ical council. Returning to Armenia he found that 
he had been supplanted by Chad of Bagravand and 
was out of favor with the king. Still more un- 
friendly were his relations with the succeeding King 
Pap, who is said to have caused his death by poison 
(384). If Moses of Chorene is correct in stating that 
Nerses was catholicos for thirty-four years, he must 
have been installed about 350, which is several 
years earlier than other authorities indicate. 

2. Nerses n.: Armenian catholicos 524-533. 
He was called *' Nerses of Ashtarak " from his na- 
tive town in Bagravand. A reforming synod was 




held by him in 527 at Tvin (Dwin). See Nbsto- 

RIAN8, § 3. 

8. Nerses m.: Catholicos 640-661; d. 661. 
He was called " the builder " because he rebuilt 
Tvin, the patriarchal city that had been destroyed 
by the Arabs. He lived in troublous times, when 
Greeks and Arabs alike were seeking to subjugate 
the Armenians. During a short interval of peace 
he held a synod at Tvin in which the Chalcedonian 
symbol was rejected. A successful Arab invasion 
(646) led the Emperor Constans II. to march an 
army into Armenia. Nerses met him and succeeded 
in pacifying him, but was obliged to accept the 
Chalcedonian symbol. After the emperor's de- 
parture another synod (648) requested him to give 
the Armenians freedom to accept or reject the 
Chalcedonian symbol. Nerses now lost his popu- 
larity by adhering to that statement of faith and 
retired from Tvin in 649, leaving the anti-Chalce- 
donian party in control. After this the Arabs again 
gained possession of the country, and, the anti- 
Chalcedonian leader Theodorus having died, Nerses 
returned to Tvin (654) and resumed the ecclesias- 
tical leadership. 

4. Nerses IV.: Catholicos 1166-73; b. about 
1098; d. Aug., 1173. Of royal lineage and princely 
birth, he was early dedicated to the Christian min- 
istry and was carefully educated under the guid- 
ance of his elder brother, the Catholicos Gregory 
III., and later of Stephen, abbot of the " Red Mon- 
astery." In 1135 he was ordained priest and soon 
afterward elevated to the episcopate. At a synod 
at Rom-Klah, held shortly before his death, Greg- 
ory, with the approval of the eynod, consecrated 
Nerses his successor. Before this time Nerses had 
become deeply interested in the question of imion 
with the Greek Church and just after his brother's 
death received from the Emperor Manuel I. an in- 
vitation to visit Constantinople in this interest. He 
was unable to accept the invitation, but wrote ap- 
provingly of union (Opera, i. 195-204, Venice, 1873). 
A second embassy from the emperor (1170) led to 
another cynod at Rom-Klah and further union 
measures (Opera, i. 231-238). As a result of other 
overtures from the emperor (1173) nine points that 
had been in dispute between Greeks and Armenians 
were agreed upon (excommunication of all Mono- 
physite leaders — Eutyches, Dioscurus, and others; 
acknowledgment of two natures, wills, and energies 
in Christ united in one personality; omission of the 
words " who was crucified " in the Trisagion [see 
Theopaschites]; celebration of the Greek festi- 
vals on the dates fixed by the Eastern Church; 
olive-oil to be used in the preparation of the myrrh 
for unction; leavened bread and vnne mixed with 
water to be used in the eucharist; laity as well as 
clergy to remain in church during communion and 
divine service; acknowledgment of the fourth, fifth, 
sixth, and seventh ecumenical councils; the cathol- 
icos to be appointed by the Greek emperor). Be- 
fore the negotiations were completed he died. 
Nerses was an eloquent speaker and an elegant 
writer. He wrote a commentary on Matthew and 
many minor exegetical pieces, and a nimiber of 
somewhat elaborate doctrinal tracts and letters. 
Several occasional discourses have been preserved. 

His most widely known work is his collection of 
short prayers for eveiy hour of the day and night. 
This has been translated into thirty-dx languages 
and frequently published in this poly^ot form (e.g., 
Venice, 1882). By his poetry he gained litmiy 
renown. Besides many shorter poems, an epic on 
the history of Armenia, an elegy on the destructiun 
of Edessa by the sultan of Aleppo, and a long re- 
ligious poem, "Jesus the Son," have been preserved 
(Venice, 1824). The Armenians regard him as their 
national Homer. He is said to have introduced 
riming into Armenian. 

6. Nerses of Lambxon: Archbishop of Tarsus; 
b. 1133; d. July 14, 1198. He was son erf a prince 
and on his mother's side a scion of the royal house 
of Arshak, also a nephew of Nerses IV., by whom 
at the age of sixteen he was ordained priest. When 
eighteen years of age he was offered an abbacy and 
a bishopric. These preferments he declined in favor 
of a long course of study with his teacher Stephen 
in a desert place. In 1176 he reluctantly accepted 
the archbishopric of Tarsus and Lambron and the 
abbacy of Skyrra. He was a highly gifted writer 
in prose and verse and was not devoid of states- 
manship. In 1179, at the request of the Catholicos 
Gregory, he participated in a eynod at Rom-Klah 
called in the interest of union witii the Greek Church. 
He spoke in favor of union and had the concurrence 
of the synod; but the death of the Emperor Manuel 
(1180) prevented its consunmiation. These efforts 
at union resulted from considerations of political 
expediency rather than from thee^ogical convic- 
tion, and when (1190) Frederick Barbarossa ap- 
proached the borders of Cilicia, Nerses accompanied 
the catholicos and the governor of Cilicia to meet 
him, evidently hoping to form an alliance with the 
Western Empire and the Latin Church. Frederick 
died before they reached the German army. Ne- 
gotiations with the Latins embittered the Greeks 
against the Armenians, whom they stigmatised as 
Eutychians. In 1193 union with the Latins was 
consummated by the Cilician Armenians, Leo, the 
governor, having been made king by the Latins 
and twelve Roman bishops, of whom Nerses was 
first, having been recognised. Nerses was highly 
honored by Greeks, Latins, and Syrians, as well as 
by his own people. He was sometimes designated 
'' the second Apostle Paul of Tarsus." But this 
high praise is hardly deserved, and he seems to have 
been more of a politician than of an apostle or the- 
ologian. He was familiar with the Latin, Greek, 
Syriac, and Coptic languages and translated a num- 
ber of works from these languages into Ar m e n ian. 
He wrote several commentaries and many practical 
works, drawing largely from the writings of Greek, 
Latin, Syriac, and Eg3rptian fathers. Among his 
poetical works is a somewhat lengthy necrology of 
his uncle Nerses IV. (St. Petersbuig, 1782). 

A. H. Newman. 

Bibuoorapht: In general oonault: F. JuBti, Iranxachn 
NamenbMch, pp. 222-225, Marburg, 1895 (refera to othera 
bearing names of Nersea and gives literature); M. Le- 
quien. OrienB Chriatianua, i. 1345, 1875, 1399, Paris, 1740. 
On Nenses I. consult: J. B. Ghidx>t, Nanai Is docUur 0l 
lea oriffines de VScole de NiaQna d^apr^ la chromque dt 
Barhadbesabbe in JA, vi. 167-177; F. X. E. Albert, Ths 
School of Niaibis, its History and Statutes, in Catholie C/fMh 


OooMilt: J. B. 

i. 415-^21) 
. IM5: and iLe encomiiua ol bim 
br Mom o( Lubron. ib. ISTSi Lybrr tuprnwum . . . 
JfB' Km^iM htmiMa in Jotfph, documcnla poirum iJ« ^- 
■ ■ -" ■ loBiMfftm, hJ. P. BedjBQ. Laipdc. leoi. 
■au&niu. fiii'uCA«ca OrirrUalit, ii. 364- 
ooa, luia*. 17IV1 Anai Ter-Uilueluui, Dir armetiichi 
Kirtke £a iArcn fiouAun^cn nr bvfonfini«cAm (A.— IX. 
JaJahtaulrrt). pp, 8S k " ~ 

sry Om Itttmatalor. pp. 35-30. Loailoa. ISeS; C. F. Neu- 
maan. KameA •««»■ auMthirhU dtr aTTnantchm Liltralur. 
p. IIK, Lcdpno. I83S: Tei^UikooUon, Nrrttn. Dot ar- 
■ wmV** ffjpmun'iBn. 5luiN«n lu Ki'iur gachieliUicliai 
£iri>neUiaw. Udpno, IWS; Tht LitvrviaU Hanilia of 
Nonai, ia TS. \iiL 1 (1909); »ad the Ulenture uader 

RBBVA, MAKCnS COCCEinS: RAnuui emperor 
from Sept. 18, 96, to Jan. 27. 98; b. at Namin (40 m. 
a. of Rome), Umbria, 32; d. at Rome Jan. 27, 98. 
[He came of a family eminent as juristo, father 
tad grandfatiier both having followed with dis- 
tinction that profession. Hia own training was 
dvil rather than railitary. These facts have bear- 
ing upon the character df his relations to the Chris- 
IJMtta as indicated below.] Proclaimed emperor 
tmmedi«lely alter the aaiiaaaination of DomitJan, 
probably in accord with a previous understanding, 
his r«gn was characterized by mildness. Domi- 
tiaa had already ceased persecuting the Christians 
and recalled the fugitives, who actually returned 
nnder Nerva (cf. Euseblus, Htal. ecd.. III., xix. 20; 
TertuUi&n, Apol., v.; Dio Caaaius, fxviii. I). He 
aloo stepped the abuses of the infonneis, forbade 
all eomplainta againet Jewish practiaee, and abn>- 
^ted the Sscal disabilities of the Jews (among 
whran the Oiristians were included). The legal sta- 
tus of Christianity, however, remained unchanged; 
and the reign of Nerva marked for them the tran- 
stioo from persecutions of caprice, such as thoee 
of Nero and Domitian, to those b^un by Trajan, 
based upoo the execution of existing law. 

(G. UamoHNt.) 

Bhuoobapht: C. Peter. OachicMt ifonu imtsr lim Xaiwrn. 
iii. 1107. HkUd. 1S7I1 B. Aub«. HiH. du po-iuuliuiu d. 
ritUt, i. IBS iqq.. Puis. 1875: K. Wiaslcr, Du Chnt- 
UmmolotaBm drr Chri^ai. pp. 12 sqq.. QUteraloh. 1S7S; 
A. H.Hore. EieUien Centaria of lAc OrtJuHiai Ortrk Church, 
p. 73. New York, IS»9; imd the oorka □□ the Fbunh his- 
(my of ilie period and od the hiatoiy of Ibe Romui empire. 

man Lutheran; b. at Stuttgart May 1, 1851, He 
was educated at the theological Bemiaaries at Blau- 
beui«n and TQbingen and at the urdversities of 
Tflbingen (Ph.D., 1874) and Leipsic (1874-75), 
after which he spent two yeara in further study in 
England. He was then a tutor at the Evangelical 
tbeotc^ical seminary at Tubingen (1877-80), dea- 
con at Mausingen, WUrttemberg {I880-S3), gym- 
Da><ial professor at Ulm (1883-90, again I893~!IS}, 
and provisional supply for the vacant professor- 
■bip of Semitic languages at the University of 
Tubingen (1890-03). Since I89S he has been pro- 
/easor in the Evangelical theological seminary at 
Msulbronn. WUrttemberg. Theologically he is an 
adherent of the mediating school. He has written: 
Die itradHimJien Eigmnamen nocA iArer religiona- 

geichichliichen Bedeutung (Haarlem, 1876); Con- 
radi Pellieani de modo tegendi atque inUiligendi 
//e&r(Eum(TQbingen, 1877); P»allerium tetragloOum, 
Grace, Syriaee, Chaldaiee, Latine (Leyden, 1879); 
Psalmi Chaldaice el Syriaee (Tubingen, 1879); 
Pmiftenum 5yriafum (1879); Brevis lingua Syriaeia 
grammalica (Carlsruhe, 1880); VelerU TeslaTnenti 
Greed codices el SinaiHcug cum (eiiu re- 
ceplo coMoK (Leipsic, 1881); Sj/rische OrammaUk 
(Berlin, 1838; reoUy a translation and second edi- 
tion of the Latin Syriac grammar; Eng. transl. by 
A. R. S. Kennedy, 1889); De eanda cruce, ein Bei- 
Irag air chrUUichen Legeruiengeschichle (1888); Sep- 
luaginlastudien (4 parts, Ulm and Maulbronn, 1886- 
1903); MargiruUien und Matcrialien (TObingen, 
1393); Novi Tentamenli Graci »upplemenlum (Leip- 
sic, 1896); Philologiat sacra, Bemerkungen flier die 
Urgealiiil drr Evangelien und Apoalelgcschichle, Ber- 
lin, 1896); and EinfOhrung in dot griechische Neue 
Testament (Tubingen, 1897, 3d ed,, 1909; Eng. 
transl. by W. Edie, London, 1901). He edited the 
sixth and seventh editions of Tiscbendorf's Septua- 
ginla (Leipsic, 1880, 1887} the Syiiac version of 
Plutarch's Dc capienda ex inimid* ulililale (London, 
1894), an edition of the Greek and Gennan New 
Testament since 1898, and an excellent edition of the 
Latin and Greek-Latin New Testament since 1906. 

NESTOR: Russian monk of the eleventh cen- 
tury, incorrectly regarded as the earliest Russian 
annalist. According to his own statements, he 
entered the cave-monaatery of Kief shortly after 
the death of Abbot Theodoaius in 1074, where he 
was soon ordained deacon or archdeacon, and where 
he wrote his " Readings from the Life and Death 
of the Blessed Martyrs Boris and Gleb " and " Life 
of the Abbot Theodoaius "; both works are charac- 
terized by edifying material and rhetoric rather 
than by history. The first Russian historical writer, 
however, was Jacob a monk of the same clobter, 
possibly identical with the priest Jacob, who seems 
to have come from the monastery of Boris and 
Gleb in Pereiaslof, whom Abiwt Tbeodosius on his 
death-bed desired for hia successor. Before 1072 
Jacob wrote his " Account of the Martyrdom and 
Eulogy of the Murdered Holy Martyrs Boris and 
Gleb," and his " Memorial and Eulogy of the Rus- 
sian Prince Wolodimer." 

As eariy as the middle of the thirteenth century 
the oldest Russian «niiiiln became connected with 
the name of Nestor; wrongly, however, for the an- 
nalist expressly states that be was an iimiate of the 
monastery in the lifetime of Theodoaius. He waa 
apparently bom at Kief, and entered the cloister 
shortly after 1065, when seventeen yeais of age. 
He was, in ail probability, Silvester, abbot of the 
monastery of St. Michael, who in 1116 stated that 
he bad written the annuls in question. Though 
borrowing from John Malalaa and Gregorius Ham- 
artoius, this pioneer Russian historian adhered 
strictly to the simpler annalistic form. 


BiBUoaBAPHi: Ckronin Warforii.ed. F. MiklQaich,pp, 183- 
ISfl, Vieans. ISflO : L. L««er. La CAmiwiudile dt NtHor. 
Psrii, 1884: P. Strahi. Batraut rur nuMrAen KinAcivr- 
Khtehli,. HsUe. 1937; J.J. Sreinevild). "The Nuraliva 
eoQcomiag tho Boly Boris nnd Gleh." 3(, Petemburg. I860 
(iaKuMUtI; KnimbMber,C«KAKU«. pp. 35. 366-397, 108, 





Rise in Persia (§ 1). 

Diffusion in Arabia, India, and China (§2). 

Varying Fortunes (§ 3). 

Under Mohammedans and Mongols (§ 4). 

Persecutions; Rapprochement with Rome (§ 5). 

History from the Sixteenth Century (§ 6). 

Kurdish Nestorians ((7). 

Nestorians of India (§ 8). 

In the Christological controversies of the fifth 
century (see CHRiSTOLoaY, V., and references given 
there) the East Syrian Chureh adopted and devel- 
oped independently the doctrines ascribed to 
Nestorius (q.v.); broke all connection with the 
monophysite and Catholic churches of West Syria, 
and became a mighty chureh party which was 
called by his name and extended its missionary 

influence as far as China. The first 

I. Rise in extension of Nestorianism was from 

Persia, the eastern boundary of the Roman 

Empire over Persia. The prime im- 
pulse was the letter of the Presbyter Ibas of Edessa 
(q.v) to Bishop Mari of Hardashir in Persia, written 
shortly after the reconciliation of Patriarch John 
of Antioch and Cyril of Alexandria (q.v.), evidently 
inclining more to the former, but at the close ex- 
pressing his joy at the reconciliation between Qyril 
and the Antiochian bishops. This letter and the 
Syriac translations of Diodorus of Tarsus and The- 
odore of Mopsuestia spread the doctrines of Nes- 
torius throughout Persia. The movement was 
aided by the expulsion of the Nestorian teachers 
from the school at Edessa and by their settlement 
in Nisibis, the most noteworthy of these scholars 
being Barsmnas, who, as bishop or metropolitan of 
Nisibis (435-489), where he established a celebrated 
theological school, zealously sought to extirpate the 
adherents of Cyril. Christianity was established 
in Persia apparently in the post-apostolic age, but 
its primitive history is wrapped in obsciuity. Un- 
der the Arsacids the Christians were apparently 
unmolested, except for one brief persecution and 
Trajan's invasion of the Parthian kingdom. Though 
the Christians were widely spread and well organ- 
ized in Persia in the third and fourth centuries (cf . 
A. Hamack, Expansion of Christianity, ii. 295 sqq., 
New York, 1905), as is clear from the writings of 
the pseudo-Bardesanes, Aphraates, and the older 
Acta martyrumf they did not yet form a distinct 
church with catholicos, bishops, and other clergy. 
Nevertheless, the bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon grad- 
ually rose to be primate of the Christians in the Sel- 
eucid kingdom and the entire orient, though his 
claims were long contested by the bishop of Persia. 
In 313 the bishop of Persia was still independent 
of the bishop of Seleucia, and the former was con- 
sidered at the Nicene Council the representative of 
all Persia and India; nor was it until the episcopate 
of Timotheus (778-820) that Seleucia definitely be- 
came the metropolitan see. Both bishoprics were 
first actually, and then nominally, subject to the 
patriarch of Antioch, but the frequent wars between 
the Romans and Persians rendered it practically 
impossible for the prelates to be consecrated at 
Antioch. Shahlufa (d. 244) seems to have been the 
first to be consecrated by the oriental bishops at 
Seleucia. This see thus early gained a certain 

measure of independence. His successor, Papa, was 
called ' archbishop; later prelates, beginning with 
Babseus (Syr. Babhai) in 499, assumed the title of 
patriarch, or catholicos, and ranked themselves after 
the patriarch of the West. While his predecessors 
Dadhisho, Babffius, and Acacius wavered between 
Catholicism and Nestorianism, Babseus II. was the 
first to break entirely with the Occidental Church. 
At a eynod held by him in 499 he enacted, among 
other things, that unconditional obedience should 
be rendered to the patriarch of Seleucia; that the 
bishops should assemble for consultation on eccle- 
siastical afifairs with their metropolitan annually 
instead of semi-annually and with their patriarch 
quadrennially instead of biennially; and that the 
patriarch, bishops, priests, and monks should be 
permitted to many one wife each and that the pres- 
byters should be required to marry another wife 
on the death of the first, the object of this canon 
being to do away with immoral relations of the 
clei^ with several wives at once. The successors 
of Babseus followed in his coiu'se, placing Nestor- 
ians in all episcopal vacancies and eageriy seeking 
to extend their domain in all directions. Nestor- 
ianism was also advocated by numerous writers, 
especially the monks of seversd monasteries in As- 
syria, as well as by the pupils of various schools, of 
which the oldest and most famous was that of 

Christianity had also spread at a veiy eariy thne 
to Arabia, to the wide districts south oi Palestine, 
Damascus, and to Mesopotamia (cf. Gal. i. 17). 
Though these Arabic communities, including such 
bishoprics as that of Bostra, were connected with 
those of Rome, both Nestorians and 
2. Diflfusion Jacobites later sought to introduce 
in Arabia, their doctrines. The former were the 
India, and more successful. Under the calif s they 
China, extended through Syria and Pales- 
tine, and during the patriarchate of 
Mar Aba II. (742-752) there was a bidiop of the Nes- 
torians in Egypt under the jurisdiction of the met- 
ropolitan of Damascus. The Arabian bishops were 
originally subject to the metropolitan of Persia, 
who also had jurisdiction over India, the western 
coast of which must have been partly Christianised 
by the beginning of the seventh centuiy. A veiy 
ancient tradition, given in the third century Acts 
of Thomas (Eng. transl. in ANF, viii. 535-^539), 
makes Thomas the apostle to India, so that the In- 
dian Christians are commonly termed Christians of 
St. Thomas. Many Christians seem to have fled to 
India from the persecutions in Persia; and in 345 
a bishop with priests from Jerusalem are said to 
have gone to Malabar. Cosmas Indicopleustes (q.v.; 
about 530) mentions churches at Malabar, there was 
one in Ceylon, as well as a bishop at Calliana; and 
in 570 the presbyter Bodh was sent to inspect the 
Indian churches. After a period of ecclesiastical 
declension, Timotheus (778-820) appointed a met- 
ropolitan for India. China received Christianity 
from Chorassan, and a long inscription in Syriac 
and Chinese at Si-ngan-fu, giving a lengthy list of 
Nestorian clergy, testifies to the prosperity and wide 
extension of Nestorianism in China in 781. This 
famous Nestorian monument was visited in 1907 by 




Frits V. Holm, who had a replica made of it which 
B DOW in the Metropolitaii Museum of Art, New 
Yoik (of. The Nesiorian Monument: an ancient 
Record of CkriaHanih/ in China, ed. P. Cams, Chi- 
cago, 1909, which contains an account of the secur- 
ing of the replica, the Chinese text of the inscrip- 
tion, A. Wylie's Eng. transl., and historical notes). 
The first metropolitan for China was appointed by 
Sdibhaiecha (714-726), and about the same time 
Herat and Samarcand received metropolitans. At 
Baikh, whence several bishops were sent to China, a 
bishopric had eaiiy been erected; and Nestorianism 
later spread through Tartary. 

The fortune of the Nestorians varied widely. 

Expelled by the emperors of the East, they enjoyed 

protection under the Parthian Arsacids, but with 

the revival of Zoroastrianism by the 

3. Varying Sassanids, their persecution began 

Foftonea. anew, though seldom except when wars 
hrcke out with the Greek emperors. 
Toward the end of the reign of Kobad (488--531) a 
twelve years' schism broke out among the Nestor- 
ians, two patriarchs, Nerses (see Nerses II.) and 
Elisseus, being elected by rival factions and each 
appointing his own bishops. The schism was ended 
by the death of Nerses in prison and the deposition 
of his rival. Mar Aba I. (536-^2), a convert from 
Zoroastrianism, translated from Greek into Syriac 
the Nestorian liturgy still in use. Among his many 
activities, he held a ^ynod in 544 at which the rule, 
still in force, was adopted that neither the patri- 
arch nor the bishops might many. Here the former 
canons were confirmed, and strict adherence to the 
Nioene Creed was required, while the standard of 
exegesis was declared to be Theodore of Mopsuestia. 
Various local schisms, moreover, caused by anti-pa- 
triarchs and anti-bishops were ended by deposition 
of the disturbing clerics. A second eynod was held 
in 577 by the patriarch Ezekiel (577-^580), the chief 
result being an edict against the Messalians. After 
repeated persecutions by Chosroes I. (who is said by 
tradition to have become a Christian in his later 
years), the Nestorians were highly favored by Hor- 
misd rV. and Chosroes II., the latter even forcing 
all Christians to adopt Nestorianism. Nevertheless, 
the latter monarch also persecuted them for choos- 
ing Gregorius patriarch against his will, and after 
the death of this prelate in 608 the patriarchate re- 
mained vacant twenty years until the accession of 
Siroes. Under this ruler and his successors the 
Nestorians enjoyed peace. 

Mohammedan persecutions of the Nestorians were 

rare, especially as Mohanmied was traditionally 

said to have received his knowledge of Christian 

doctrines from a Nestorian monk named Sergius; 

and the Nestorians claim to have re- 

4. Under ceived letters of protection from the 
Mohamme- prophet, Omar Ali, and others. They 

dans and held high posts as governors of cities 

Mongols, and districts, secretaries of califs and 
emirs, and physicians in ordinary; 
whfle they were also distinguished translators into 
Syriac and Arabic. Such was their influence that 
Qa'im bi'amr Allah and Muqtadir Billah subjected 
the Catholic Christians, the Melchites, and the 
Jacobites to the jurisdiction of the patriarchs. Ex- 

cept for a brief persecution by Hanm al-Rashid, 
only two occurred during the entire period — one by 
Mutawakkil, and the other by Hakim bi'amr Allah, 
the latter including all Christians and the Jews, but 
restricted to Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. After 
the foundation of Bagdad, the patriarchs were 
chosen and had their residence there, though con- 
secrated in Seleucia. Under the Mongols, in like 
manner, the conditions of the Nestorians were gen- 
erally peaceful. Hulagu Khan, who took Bagdad 
in 1268, and most of his successors favored the 
Nestorians not only because they were opposed to 
the Mohammedans, the political foes of the Mon- 
gols, but also on account of the superficial similari- 
ties between Nestorian Christianity and the Mongol 
type of Buddhism and through the Christian wives 
of some of the khans. Certain Mongol rulers, in- 
deed, became converts to Christianity, particularly 
in the district of the Keraites south of the Lake of 
Baikal; and the dynastic title of these latter khans, 
Unk-khan or Owang-khan, corrupted to Joan or 
Johannes, seems to have given rise to the legend of 
Prester John (q.v.), which was later transferred to 
the hitherto unknown Christian king in Ethiopia 
(i.e., Abyssinia). In 1292 the Minorite Johannes de 
Monte Corvino converted a descendant of Unk-khan 
and several of his court from Nestorianism to Ca- 
tholicism; but the Roman Catholic community 
thus founded proved of short duration, the converts 
returning to Nestorianism in 1299 (see Monools, 

The first direct persecution of the Nestorians, after 
their centuries of peace under Arabs and Mongols, 
was by Timur, who oppressed Christian and Mo- 
hammedan alike. The Nestorian con- 
5. Persecu- nections with the Far East now came 
tions; Rap- to an end and the churches there fell 
prochement into decay. The advance of Islam op- 
with pressed or destroyed the Christians in 
Rome. Tartary and India, and a like course 
was pursued by the Shiites in Persia 
and by the Mohammedan d3masties in Hither Asia. 
In addition to all this, the popes, especially after the 
advent of ther pro-Christian Mongols, sent many 
missionaries to counteract Nestorianism. Their 
efiforts were largely successful, the first distinguished 
convert being the metropolitan Sahaduna in 628, and 
shortly afterward Heraclius, in his journey to Assyria, 
converted numbers of Nestorians and Monophy- 
sites. During the pontificate of Eugene IV., Tim- 
otheus of Tarsus, metropolitan of the Nestorians in 
Cyprus, attended the synods of Florence and Rome 
in hopes of union. Innocent IV. sent certain bish- 
ops with a letter to Rabban Ara, vicar of the Nes- 
torian East, and in his reply was included a creed 
prepared by the archbishop of Nisibis and signed by 
two other archbishops and three bishops, in which 
Mary was designated " the Mother of Christ " (1247). 
Similar letters were written at the same time by the 
Jacobite patriarch Ignatius and the Mafrian Jo- 
hannes. Nicolas IV. addressing a letter with a 
creed to the patriarch Yahballaha in 1288, his 
successor Benedict XI. received an answer in 1304 
in which the Roman Catholic Church was termed 
" the mother and teacher of all others " and the 
Pope was called " the chief shepherd of all Chrieh 




tendom." In 1445, moreover, all the Cyprian Nes- 
torians with their patriarch Timotheus of Tarsus 
were converted to the Roman Catholic faith by 
Archbishop Andrew. 

More lasting contact with the Roman Catholic 
Church began with the middle of the sixteenth cen- 
tury. Except for the Christians of St. Thomas in 
India, the Nestorians were then a small remnant 
with a few bishops in the Kurdish mountains. The 
patriarchate had become hereditary, 
6. History nephew succeeding uncle. In 1551 
from the this system resulted in a schism, and 
Sixteenth one faction sent its candidate for con- 
Century, secration to Rome, where he was pro- 
claimed patriarch of the Chaldeans by 
Julius III. The schism still exists, the Uniate 
patriarch of the Chaldeans, always called Joseph, 
residing at Diarbekr, Mosul, and since 1830, Bagdad. 
In 1888 his jurisdiction included four archdioceses 
and seventeen dioceses, with some 33,000 souls. 
The patriarch of the non-Uniate Nestorians, always 
termed Simeon, lives in the almost inaccessible 
valley of Kochannes in the Kurdish mountains on 
the boundary between Persia and Turkey. In 1833 
the number of these Nestorians, living in the Kur- 
dish mountains and on the shores of the Lake of 
Urumiah, and constituting, except for the scanty 
communities in India, the sole remnants of this 
once powerful sect, were estimated at 70,000 souls. 
They do not, however, call themselves Nestorians — 
a term now employed only for the Nestorian Uni- 
ates — ^but Chaldeans, Meshi|^aye (" followers of the 
Messiah"), Nasrani (Arab., ''Christians"), Syrians, 
As3yrians, and Maden^aye ("Orientals"), declaring 
that Nestorius, whose language they did not know, 
was not their patriarch, and that he followed them 
rather than they him. Since 1834 American mis- 
sionaries have worked among the non-Uniates, not 
only keeping them from being absorbed by the 
Roman Catholic missions surrounding them — es- 
pecially the Dominicans stationed at Mosul to coun- 
teract the American Protestant influence — ^but also 
raising their moral and intellectual status, a task 
the more difficult since they are unstable and in- 
clined to sensuality and superstition. The Ameri- 
can missionaries, moreover, have preserved the 
modem Syriac dialect of the Nestorians and devel- 
oped it into a literary language, into which they have 
translated the Bible and written or translated an 
abundance of religious literature. The spoken 
language is divided into a number of dialects, falling 
mainly into the plain and mountain groups, the 
latter presenting the fuller forms. The liturgies 
and other ritual books of both Nestorians and Chal- 
deans are in classical Syriac. They live in almost 
constant open hostility with the Mohammedan 
Kurds, who in 1846 massacred some 6,000 of all 
ages and both sexes. 

The Chaldean Nestorians have eight ranks in 
their clergy: ^atholil^a or patriarl^a; metropolifa 
or mutran; episkopa; arkidyal^ona; kas^iisha 
C ' priest ") ; shammasha ( * ' deacon ' ') ; huhpody- 
aljLona (" subdeacou ") ; and |j:aroya ("reader"). 
The Kurdish Nestorians are characterized by a 
pronounced Judaic Christianity which is also ap- 
parent in their rituals. Those in northern Mesopo- 

tamia now have nine dioceses with metropolitans, 
bishops, etc. Among their peculiarities is their 
aversion to all religious representations, 
7. Kurdish only the Cross and the portrait of 
Nestorians. Christ being allowed in their churches. 
Their number of sacraments varies. 
In the medieval period it was seven, Timotheus II. 
(1318-60) defining them as ordination, consecra- 
tion of a church or altar, baptism and unction, 
the Eucharist, benediction of monks, office for the 
dead, and marriage, with indulgence, or penance, 
and absolution as an appendix. Ajssemani held 
that they had but three sactaments: baptism, the 
Eucharist, and ordination. Among the modem 
Nestorians the Eucharist is a magkr ceremony with 
certain peculiar usages. The Nestorian fasts are 
very numerous, meat being forbidden on 152 days. 
They eat no pork, and keep both the Sabbath and 
Sunday. They believe in neither auricular con- 
fession nor puigatory, and permit their priests to 
many. The Nestorians of the plains, who are more 
intelligent than their mountain brethren, have 
peculiar marriage customs, and some of the usages 
of their other feasts are of interest. The mountain 
Nestorians are employed chiefly in hunting and 
pasturage. Their houses are in general wretched 
afifairs, often having but one room, sometimes im- 
deiground. They add to their resources by selling 
nut-galls, and are renowned for their basketry, 
especially in the district of Cheba, whence baskets- 
venders traverse all Asia. They also engage in 
weaving and apiculture. Their chief food is barley 
bread, roasted meal, dried mulberries, and milk and 
its products. Despite their poverty they are ex- 
tremely hospitable. They are governed by heredi- 
tary village sheiks called malik (Arab., '' king "). 
Their cleigy, who are greeted by kissing their hands 
and raising the hat (a usage not conmion elsewhere 
in the East), are ignorant but highly honored. 

The Nestorians of India, after receiving a metro- 
politan from the Patriarch Timotheus (778-820), 
had bishops appointed henceforth immediately by 
the patriarch. They enjoyed special privileges 
from the native princes, particularly after the be- 
ginning of the ninth century, these being due pri- 
marily to Thomas Kananseus (also 
8. Nestorians called Mar Thomas), who seems to have 
of India, been a wealthy and influential mer- 
chant, and not a bishop. Thanks to 
these privileges and their increase in population, 
they gradually became able to have kings of their 
own, but on the extinction of the dynasty their 
little domain was inherited by the rulers of Cochin. 
The internecine strife of the Indian princes so op- 
pressed the Christians of St. Thomas that in 1502 
they offered the crown to Vasco da Gama, when he 
landed in India. The bond between the Indian 
Nestorians and the patriarch seems to have been 
broken at an early date. About 1120-30 their 
spiritual head, Johannes, seems to have gone to 
Constantinople to request consecration, and thence 
to Rome. Later the church sank so that only a 
deacon was left to perform all ecclesiastical func- 
tions. Geoigius and Joseph were accordingly sent 
in 1490 to the Nestorian patriarch to obtain a 
bishop; they were ordained priests and received the 




monks Thomas and Johannes as bishops. The 
patriarch Elias (d. 1502) consecrated three more 
monks bishops and sent them to India, where they 
reported some 30,000 Christian families, scattered 
in twenty cities, chiefly in Carangol, Palor, and 
Colom, although there were churches in all cities. 
Later Portuguese accounts reduce the niunber of 
Christian families to 16,000. In extreme poverty 
and oppressed from every side, they declared their 
sole allegiance to King Emmanuel of Portugal. 
The result was their destruction, oppressed both by 
the native princes because of this Portuguese alli- 
ance and also crushed by the Portuguese themselves. 
They were obliged, moreover, by Alexius Menezes, 
archbishop of Goa, to accept the decisions of the 
synod held at Diamper in 1599, so that only a few 
communities in the mountains remained true to the 
faith of their fathers. But in 1653 they revolted 
from their enforced union with the Roman Catholic 
Church, nor have the efforts of the Discalced Car- 
meUtes since that time availed to reconcile the Indian 
" Nestorians with Rome. In 1665, on the other hand, 
the patriarch Ignatius of Antioch sent the Jacobite 
metropolitan Gr^ory of Jerusalem to Malabar, 
where he introduced a Jacobite tendency among 
the non-Uniates which became wide-spread, the 
Malabar Jacobites being estimated at nearly 170,000 
by the younger missionary Baker. 

The present nimiber of Nestorians in Kurdistan 
and Persia is estimated at something over 150,000, 
with 250 churches, twelve archbishops and bishops, 
and more than 300 priests; the Chaldeans at over 
100,000, with 150 churches and more than 250 
prii»ts. In India there are some 120,000 Nestorians 
and 250,000 Uniates. (K. KESSLERf.) 

Bibuografht: Tlie chief source, outside the writings 
named in the text, is J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalist 
espedaUy vol. ii., part 2, 3 vols., Rome. 1719-28. Con- 
nilt further: H. Le Quien, OrienM ChrisHantUt 3 vols., 
Palis, 1740; Greeory Barhiebrsus, Chronicon eccUnatH- 
CMm, ed. Abbelooe and Lamy, 3 vols.. Paris, 1872-1877; 
J. Guidi, OwUyriache Biachofe und Biachofsaitze, in ZDMO, 
zliii (1889), 388-414; E. A. Wallis Budge. The Book of 
Govemort: The Hitioriea Moruutiea of Thonuu, Bishop 
of Marga, A.D. 8M>, formvng a Hidory of Neetorian Mo- 
wuticiam and Asceticism for aver Three Hundred Yearst 
2 vols., London, 1893; Hisloire de Mar Jab Aloha, ed. P. 
Bedjan^ Paris, 1895; Mori ibn Sulaiman, Maris Amri el 
Sliba de patriarchis Nestorianortan commentaria, ed. H. 
Gismondi, 2 parts. Rome, 1896-99; the " Chronicle " of 
Mif-hinJ Uie Syrian has been edited by J. B. Chabot, 2 
vols., Paris. 1899-1901; O. Braun, Das Buch der Synha- 
dos, Stuttgart, 1900; G. Diettrich, Die Nestorianische 
Tauflitwvie ins Deutsche Hbersetii, Giessen. 1903; The 
Easi Syrian or Nestorian Rite transUUed by A. J. Maclean, 
London* 1905; Acts of the synods collected in A. Mai, 
Scrij^orum velerum nova collection vol. x., Rome, 1838; 
and by J. B. Chabot, in Notes el extraits, xxxvii. 095 sqq., 
Paris, 1902. On Nestorian canonical Law cf. the disser- 
tation by H. Leclercq in the Fr. trazisl. of Hefele's Con- 
cHienoeschichte, ii. 1271-1301. Paris, 1908. For Nestorian 
authora consult: Assemani, ut sup., i. 1-362; W. Wright, 
A Short Hist, of Syriae Literature, pp. 166 sqq., London, 
1894; R. Duval, Anciennes littiratures chritiennes, vol. 
ii., Paris, 1900; H. Labourt, De Timotheo /. Nestorianum 
patriarcha {728-8£3), Paris, 1904. General accounts are: 
J. W. Etheridge, The Syrian Churches, London, 1846; 
G. P. Badger, The Nestorians and their Ritual, 2 vols., 
London, 1852; A. Grant, Hist, of the Nestorians, London, 
1855; Georgius Ebedjeeu Khayyath, Syri orientales sen 
Chaldari Nesioriani, Rome, 1870; A. Kleiss, Sur les mis- 
sions nestoriennea en Chine au vii. siicle, Paris, 1880; A. 
d'Avril. La Chaldie ehritienne, Paris, 1892; H. Holme, 
The Oldest Chrielian Church, London, 1896; J. £. Heller, 

Das nestorianische Denkmal in Singan-fu, Budapest, 1897; 
W. K6hler, Die katholischen Kirchen des MorgerUandes, 
Darmstadt, 1898; B. Ssechenyi, Wissenschaftiiche Ergeb- 
nisse der Reise in Ostasien 1877-80, vol. ii., Vienna, 1898; 
W. Barthold, Zur QeschichU des Christentums in Mittel- 
Asien bis sur mongolischen Eroberung, Tflbingen, 1901; 
S. Jamil, Oenuina rdationes inter sedem apostolicam el 
Assyriorum orientalium seu Chaldcsorum ecclesiam, Rome, 
1902; J. Labourt, Le Christianisme dans V empire Perse 
sow la dynastie Sassanide, tt4-6SM, Paris, 1904; DCB, 
iv. 29-33. For the Nestorians in India consult: G. B. 
Howard, Christians of St. Thomas and Their Liturgies, 
Oxford, 1864; J. D. Macbride, The Syrian Church in India, 
Oxford, 1856; W. J. Richards. The Indian Christians of 
St. Thomas, otherwise Called the Syrian Christians of Mala- 
bar, London, 1908; V. A. Smith, Early Hist, of India, pp. 
218 sqq., Oxford, 1908. For Kurdish and Mesopotamian 
Nestorians consult: J. Perkins, A Residence of Eight Years 
in Persia among the Nestorian Christians, Andover, 1843; 
Sketches of Pious Nestorians . . . cU Oroomiah, Persia, 
Boston, 1857; T. Laurie, Dr. Grant and the Mountain Nes- 
torians, Boston, 1874; A. J. Maclean and W. H. Brown, 
The Catholicos of the East, his People, London, 1892; G. 
Oussani, Modem Chaldeans and Nestorians, in Johns Hop- 
kins Semitic Papers, 1902, pp. 72-90.; W. A. Wigram, 
The Doctrinal Position of the Assyrian or East Syrian 
Church, London, 1908. Much of ioterest and importance 
will be found under Syrian Church. Material is also to 
be found in the periodicals Der chrisUiche Orient, Oriens 
Christianus, Bessarione, and Revue de Vorient chrUien, 


Life and Writings ({ 1). 

Teaching (§ 2). 

Beginning of Opposition to Him (S 3). 

Formal Attack (§ 4). 

The Cotmcil of Ephesus (§ 5). 

Events tiU Neetorius' Death ({ 6). 

Nestorius, the famous patriarch of Constanti- 
nople and tiie founder of the sect which still bears 
his name (see Nestorians), was bom in Germanicia, 
not far from the boundary between Cilicia and Cap- 
padocia, and died in exile after 451. Educated 

at Antioch, he lived as a monk in a 

I. Life and monastery before the city walls. Here 

Writing he won fame as a pulpit orator. In 

April, 428, he was consecrated patriarch 
of Constantinople, succeeding Sisinnius (d. Dec. 24, 
427), his election being due to the court, which 
would not choose as patriarch a resident of Constan- 
tinople. The impression which he made on the 
bishops present at his consecration was extremely 
favorable, and he quickly manifested great zeal 
against the heretics, destroying an Arian place of 
worship in Constantinople on the fifth day after 
being enthroned. He claimed to be the real inspirer 
of the edict against heretics of May 30, 428; he pro- 
ceeded against the Novatians, the Macedonians on 
the Hellespont, and the Quartodecimanians in Asia 
Minor. Yet in Dec., 430, Nestorius himself, the firm 
opponent of all heretics, was anathematized as a 
heretic by Cyril of Alexandria. Before proceeding 
to an account of the origin of the Nestorian con- 
troversy, some description of the fragments of his 
numerous writings should be given. Gennadius 
(De vir. iU., liv.; Eng. transl., NPNF, 2. ser., iii. 
394-395) states that Nestorius wrote "a great 
many treatises on divers themes " while still a pres- 
byter at Antioch, and that after his consecration he 
wrote a work on the Incarnation. Ebed Yesu (J. S. 
Assemani, Bibliotheca orierUalis, III., i. 35-36, Rome, 
1719) mentions, besides ''several books" destroyed 
by non-Nestorians, the following: Liber tragcBdia, 
a history of his controversy; LiJber Heradidis; Epia^ 




tola ad Cosmam; a liturgy; Uber epistolarum; and 
Liber homUiarum et orationum. The extant frag- 
ments comprise only his anathemas against Cyril as 
translated by Marius Mercator; twelve other anath- 
emas in Syriac translation; fragments of the " Trag- 
edy"; fourteen letters or fragments of letters; some 
sermons translated by Marius Mercator; and a num- 
ber of citations in the writings of Qyril of Alexandria, 
Marius Mercator, Cassian, Amobius the Younger, 
Leontius, the Synodicon, the Acts of the Council of 
Ephesus, and other sources. The fragments are col- 
lected by F. Loofs in Nestariana (Halle, 1905). 
P. Bed j an has edited a newly discovered Syriac 
translation of the Liber Heradidis (Paris, 1910). 
The material has been employed by J. F. Bethune- 
Baker in his Nestoriita arid hia Teaching, A freak 
Examination of the Evidence (Cambridge, 1908). 

The origin of the Nestorian controversy doubtless 
lay in the antithesis between the Antiochian train- 
ing of Nestorius and the Alexandrine traditions, or 
Apollinarian coloring, which prevailed in his new 
surroundings. Nevertheless, there were representa- 
tives of the two schools in Constanti- 

2. Teach- nople before Nestorius came, and it 
ing. was already a moot question whether 
Mary was to be called mother of God 
or mother of man. Nestorius entered upon the 
struggle with the first of his '' Sermons against the 
'Mother of God,' " delivered not later than Christ- 
mas, 428. This was quickly followed by other 
sermons on the same theme. Declaring himself 
sharply opposed to the epithet " mother of God," 
he declared: "Mary did not give birth to divinity, 
but to man, the instrument of divinity." Here his 
motive was his desire to exalt the divinity of Christ, 
holding, as he did in his first sermon, that " the crea- 
ture hath not given birth to the uncreatable." He 
was also offended by the cult of Mary easily arising 
from the belief that she was the mother of God, yet 
he never failed to recognize that the epithet might 
be employed if the views and tendencies which he op- 
posed were separated from it. Since, however, such 
a use of the term as he advocated seemed to him 
to be very rare at the beginning of his patriarchate 
at Constantinople, he reconmiended that Mary be 
called " mother of Christ " instead of " mother of 
God." This, he held, like the terms "Son" and 
"Lord," referred to both natures of Christ. Fol- 
lowing Antiochian Christology, he yet sought to 
avoid the charge that it taught two Sons, saying, 
for instance, ** we have not two Christs or two Sons; 
for there is not n^dth us a first and a second, or one 
and another, or one Son at one time and another 
at another, but the same one is twofold, not in 
honor, but in nature." While holding that most of 
the statements of the Bible concerning the Son of 
God refer to the incarnate Word, Nestorius taught 
that after the incarnation the Son of God was no 
longer the Logos per se. The inunediate basis is 
indeed purely Antiochian, declaring emphatically 
that the Son was twofold in nature and that the 
mother of Christ bore the Son of God as man who 
was the Son through the Son conjoined, thus dis- 
tinguishing the natures but unifying adoration of 
him. On the other hand, Nestorius modified the An- 
tiochian dyophysitism by holding that each nature 

worked by sharing in the peculiar properties of the 
other. His Christology was thus based on the prim- 
itive double view of the historic Christ which was 
the basis of the earliest Christology, saying " we 
confess the God in man, we reverence the man wor- 
shiped together with God Almighty through the 
divine union." The earnestness of his endeavor, 
despite his dyophysitism, to see a single God-man 
is shown in his denunciation as a monothelite by 
the synod of 680 because he had written " God the 
Logos was not one and the man bom therein an- 
other, for there was one person of them both, in 
reverence and honor distinguished neither in man- 
ner nor time by difference of decree or will." * 

The condenmation of Nestorius for these teachings 
was brought about by Cyril of Alexandria (q.v.), 
though Nestorius had already met with considerable 
opposition in Constantinople. Nestorius did not 
fail to return the attacks in kind, securing the con- 
demnation of Philip, one of his former 
3. Begin- rivals for the patriarchate. But not- 
ning of withstanding all these difiiculties, Nes- 
Opposition torius could write to Pope Celestine 
to Him. (Mansi, ConcUia, iv. 1022 D, 1024 C), 
that tlie church at Constantinople 
was flourishing. In the latter part of 430 he and 
his deigy had determined in what sense the term 
" mother of God " could and should be used, thus 
retracting his opposition to the phrase, and John 
of Antioch thought that the troubles in Constan- 
tinople were at an end. The complaints of Cyril 
and the monks opposed to Nestorius, alleging griev- 
ous schism in Constantinople, accordingly deserve 
no credence. While still at Antioch Nestorius 
seems to have prepared sermons for publication, 
and after his consecration he united these older 
sermons and more recent ones, including several 
on the mother of God, into a book of considerable 
size (at the latest by the beginning of 429), after- 
ward circulating other sermons subsequently de- 
livered. Individual sermons, or possibly the en- 
tire book, were sent by Nestorius to Rome, and a 
collection of his sermons also found its way to 
Egypt, doubtless without the author's wish. Shortly 
after Easter, 429, Cyril took occasion to write to 
all the monks of I^gypt justifying the use of the 
term " mother of God " and opposing the argu- 
ments of Nestorius without mentioning his name. 
Copies of this letter were brought to Constanti- 
nople, where they strengthened the opposition, 

* 1q Athanasius (II., 8 2) a reference appears pTomising 
a minute examination of the Athananan Christokigy in the 
article Nestorius. This was probably inspired by the fact 
that writings usually attributed to Athanasius would make 
him a forerunner of Nestorius. But Professor Loofs (Leit- 
faden turn Studien der DogmengeaehichUt^ pp. 264-266, Halle, 
1906) refers to R. Hoss (.Siudim fiber das Schriftthum und 
die Theologie dea Athanaaius . . . , Leipsic, 1899) and A. 
StQlcken (Athanaeiana, ib. 1899) as disproving the alleged 
Athanosian authorship of those writings. This leaves as 
the salient facts that the Athanasian Christology remained 
essentially unchanged from the first, that it was the divine 
side which engaged his attention, that his references to the 
human side were t.'aditional and never closely analysed, 
and that in the hLtoricol Christ there was only one sub- 
ject, the Logos, and that Christ grew, hungered, and suf- 
fered in his flesh. No vital connection can be established 
between the Christology of Athanasius and of Nestorius 
so far as the human side is concerned. c. a. b. 




hitherto weak, against Nestorius. Photius, a 
presbyter of Nestorius, now wrote against Cyril's 
letter, and Nestorius preached a sermon to prove 
that the Logos could be subject neither to birth 
nor suffering. Both the letter and the sermon 
were sent to Alexandria, but before they reached 
there Cyril heard of his opponents' disapproval of 
his attitude and wrote his first letter to Nestorius. 
For a time the correspondence was conducted with 
external coiulesy, but soon the hostility between 
the two patriarchs became irreconcilable. This was 
due less to dermatic reasons, however, than to 
calumnies uttered to Nestorius against CyriH. The 
latter now wrote his second letter early in 430, in 
which, after a brief mention of the Alexandrine 
ehaiges, he proceeded to instruct Nestorius in the 
true faith. While it would seem from these letters 
that the controversy was essentially theological, 
Cyril's letter to the clergy in Constantinople, writ- 
ten almost at the same time, makes it clear that 
his real motive was his fear of being cited to ap- 
pear at Constantinople to answer the chaiges 
brought against him. 

His war of extermination against Nestorius now 
began. To this end he wrote three lengthy letters 

covertly attacking his rival to the em- 

4. Fonnal peror, his sister, and the empress, and 

Attack, at the same time endeavored to win 

over Celestine, of whose position he 
was uncertain. For the latter purpose, he wrote, 
eariy in 430, his five books ** Against the Blas- 
phemies of Nestorius," attacking in detail forty- 
three citations from t^ writings of his antagonist. 
In the spring of the same year he sent this work, 
together with numerous sermons of Nestorius, and 
his own two letters to him, to Celestine, with a 
clever letter of his own to the pope, not free from 
misrepresentations. The result was fully success- 
ful for Cyril, although the reason is somewhat 
problematical. It would seem that Cyril actually 
convinced Celestine that '^ at one time Nestorius 
made Christ mere man, and at another attributed 
to him participation in divinity." This is the atti- 
tude, at least, assimied by Cassian in De incamaiione 
Domini contra Nestarium, At the same time Celes- 
tine was evidently offended at Nestorius by his 
kindly, but innocent, reception of Ccelestius, Julian, 
and three other bishops, who had been convicted 
of Pelagianism in the West. With their views Nes- 
torius could not possibly have sympathized, nor 
did he intend to oppose the pope. He learned of 
the nature of the chaiges against them through the 
Comnumitanum of Marius Mercator, which resulted 
in the expulsion of the Pelagians from Constanti- 
nople. Nestorius had already written Celestine at 
least twice to learn the reason of their condemna- 
tion at Rome, but the pope was so offended by the 
patriarch's protection of the refugees that he left 
his letters unanswered. In Aug., 430, Celestine held 
a synod at Rome and excommunicated Nestorius 
unless he should publicly recant within ten days 
after learning of the decree. He wrote to the same 
effect to Nestorius, the clergy of Constantinople, 
John of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, the Mace- 
donian bishops, and Cyril. The latter was formally 
authorised to pronounce anathema on Nestorius I 

unless he should recant within the appointed time. 
He accordingly held his synod at Alexandria early 
in November and wrote a synodical epistle to Nes- 
torius, which was given him, together with a letter 
from Celestine, on Dec. 6, 430. Cyril could now con- 
sider himself close to his goal of crushing Nestorius 
if he could have equal success at court in parrying 
the charges against himself by accusing his op- 
ponent. But here he failed, and though the course 
of events is obscure, it is certain that his letter 
found very unfavorable reception at coiu*t and that 
the charges against him were still believed. Nes- 
torius himself, who enjoyed the favor of the coiut, 
had purposed to hold a general synod in the sum- 
mer of 430 to discuss primarily other ecclesiastical 
matters than his controversy with Qyril, though 
the latter was also doubtless intended to be con- 
sidered. The Emperor Theodosius accordingly di- 
rected the synod to convene at Ephesus at Easter, 
431, at the same time again manifesting his disap- 
proval of Cyril. Under these circumstances Nes- 
torius was little disturbed by the letters of Celes- 
tine and Cyril. He enjoyed the support of his clergy 
and speedily opposed twelve counter-anathemas to 
the twelve anathemas of Cyril attached to his 
synodical letter, which were equally offensive to 
John of Antioch, Theodoret, and Andrew of 

After some delay, the Council of Ephesus was 
opened on June 22, 431, with 198 bishops, fifty of 
these being partizans of Cyril, who was also sup- 
ported by forty bishops from Asia and 
5. The twelve from Pamphilia, while John of 
Council of Antioch with his bishops and the dele- 
Ephesus. gates from Rome were still on the 
way. The Imperial Commissary Can- 
didian and sixty-eight dissenting bishops pleaded 
in vain that the council be not opened until all 
had arrived. On the very first day of the council 
Nestorius was condemned and declared deposed 
from all clerical office. The emperor, however, on 
June 29, commanded further consideration of the 
matter. Meanwhile the Antiochian bishops had 
reached Ephesus and opened a counter-council on 
June 27 at which they exconmiunicated Cyril's 
partizans and declared Cyril and his chief adherent, 
Mcnmon of Ephesus, deposed. This condemnation 
was signed by forty-three bishops and both parties 
sought through their sympathizers to defend them- 
selves at court. The Roman envoys came in July, 
joined Cyril, and held a second session with them 
on July 10, joining on the following day in the con- 
demnation of Nestorius. Other sessions of Cyril's 
council were held on July 16, 17, 22, and Aug. 31; 
but the real decision now lay with the coiu*t since 
the factions both of Cyril and of Nestorius refused 
to change their position. While still maintaining 
his views, Nestorius declared himself ready to retire 
to his monastery at Antioch. In the first half of 
August the court sent the Comes Sacrorum Johan- 
nes and confirmed the deposition of both councils. 
Cyril and Memnon were interned and Nestorius 
was committed to the custody of his friend Can- 
didian. Johannes was unable to reconcile the fac- 
tions, and eight delegates of both sides were sum- 
moned to the imperial court. It is noteworthy 




that the ADtlDchiaD party, which included John of 
Antioch and Theodoret, made no special plea for 
Nestoriua, while their opponents worked earnestly 
in behalf of C^ril and Memnon. Nestorius was 
now required to retire to hie monastery at Antioch 
and readily obeyed. Henceforth he waa dead to 
the court, where Alexandrine influence for some 
unknown reason now became supreme; and on 
Oct. 23, 431, Maximian waa consecrated patriarch 
of Constantinople, Hoon Bhowing his sympathy with 
Cyril by deposiag four of the chief aupportcrs of his 

Despite the victory of Cyril, he was still but par- 
tially Bucceeaful, foe ecclemaatical union between 
him and the Antiochiana was stiU broken. The 
emperor, however, forced peace on the Church, and 
after a long series of negotiations in which Paul of 

Emesa acted as mediator and letters 

6> Events were exchanged not only between 

till Cyril and John of Atilioch, but also 

Reatoriui's between the latter and Pope Sixtus 

Death, and Maximian of Constantinople, Cyril, 

in the spring of 433, acccpt«d a creed 
submitted to him by John (which shows a striking 
similarity to the Antiochian creed of 431 which is 
aacribed on creditable authority to Theodoret, to 
which Nestorius himself inight have subscribed), 
while John acquiesced in the condemnation of Nes- 
torius and recognized Maximian as patriarch. This 
peace resullcd in the schiam ot the Persian Nes- 
torians (see Nebtorianb, J 1), and wba also ud- 
pleiising to many Antiochians, including Theodoret 
and Acocius of Berea. Some of the bisbopa even 
allowed themselves to be deposed, yet within a tew 
years it waa possible for such decided friends of 
Nestorius as Irenieus to be consecrated bishop. 
The dogmatic problem was still unsolved and waa 
to be threshed out anew in Eutychionism (q.v.V 
Nestorius lived in high honor at Antioch after the 
autumn of 431, although Celestine u:^ed that he 
be banished from all human society. On July 30, 
435, however, Theodosiua promulgated an edict in 
'which he branded the Nestorians with the name of 
Simonians u[id ordered the writings of Nestorius to 
be burned. About the same time Nestorius himself 
was exiled to Oasis in I^pt, The reason for this 
Blem measure is unknown, but it is not impossible 
that either the Tragadia ot Nestorius had excited 
the imperial displeasure or that John of Antioch 
■was disturbed by the presence in the same city of the 
friend he hod denied. Nestorius was still living 
in Ousis when Socrates completed his church his- 
tory in 439. Indeed the Liber MeradvUa proves 
that he sunived the opening of the Council ot 
Chttlcedon (451). Evagrius has preserved two let- 
ters written during his banishment, according to 
which he was set free by an attack of the nomads 
on Oasis, whereupon he surrendered himself to the 
governor of the ThebaJd " lest he be suspected of 
flight or some other crime." He was then dragged 
within a short time from one place ot banishment 
to a second, a third, and a fourth. The toiior of 
these letters and other details of the life ot Nes- 
torius during his exile may be shown by the Libtr 
HeraetulU, as yet accessible, however, only in the 
Syriac. (F. LooFs.) 

t£xt. ^pAqjiJly of Hole are tbe Oppro and Liiergt of Cyiil 
of Alnximdria. in StPO. txzvi.'lxxvii.; the Opm ot 
MoriUB MercaloT, od. Csnisr (sf. tlie prelioe). Pari*. 
1073. and Bnluic. ib. leM. al» in MFI.. ilviii., tlie Optm 
at Cusian. (spwiilly his Dt ineomatitme. in CSEL, vol. 
ivii.; ths Oprro uf Thoddoret, UGP, lixx.-liotiiv.: uul 
thp Commonilonuin of Vlnoant of Lerin», in MPU voL 
I. Of fint inpoRance un the Acts of the Ommcil tt 
Epbaui iD Muiai. Cntuilia, Tola. iv.~v.i Hefde. Cait- 
ciiieTtgwchichCt. vol. ii.. Enc. trutal.. vol. iii.. Fr. tiaml. 
ii, 1, pp. 319-377. <:f. ii. 2. npiwidii 4 on Un NtatoiiMi 

diKuniao. the ed. ot J. Chiystal, 3 vols.. Jtrmey (SV. 


ConsuJl funher: TiUemoDt. MtmBira. vol. liv.. Vsiiee^ 
I7.-J2; C. W. F. WaJeh, Hittori, dtr KtUmim, v. 28tt- 
03e. Leipiic. 1770; Fabriciui-Haries. BMiaUiica Otata, 
X. G29-54S, HambuiE. 18D7: A. lliierD'. LeM Ormda 
HSrtiifs da Viime aiiett, NcMariia d Balyr/iit, Paria, 1878: 
L. Feadt. Die CArufoIoa» del Nttforiui. Kempten. I9iq; 
CaUIipr. Atilrum •arrit. viii. 308-374 Et panim: DCB. iv. 
33-34: ScbiLS. ChriMjn Church, iii. 714-719: and ia 
seneraJ the irorks on the church hiainiv of the periad- 

nETHERLAITDS. See Bbloitiui Holland. 

RETHinm. See Levi Lcvn 

',5 3. 

NETO, n^to, SEBASTIAN JOSE: Patriarch of 

Lisbon and cardinal -priest of Tlie Twelve Apos- 
tles; b. at LagOB, Portugal, Feb. 8, 1841. He en- 
tered the order of Observnutine Minorites, and in 
1870 was consecrated bishop ot Angola and the 
Kongo. Eleven years later, he wiu enthroned 
patriarch of Lisbon, and in 13S4 was created car- 
dinal. Ue is a member of the Congregations of the 
Propaganda, Riles, Indulgences, and the Lauie- 

CarmeUtc and leading theological opponent of the 
doctrines ot Wyclif; b. at 8affron-Wa!den (35 m. 
n.n.w. ot London), Essex (whence his appellation 
Waldensis), probably about 1380; d. in Rouen (T), 
France, Nov. 3, 1431. He was educated at Oxford 
and, entering the Carmelite order, became English 
provincial in 1414. In the somo year, having al- 
ready attended the Synod ot Pisa in 1409, he went 
to (he Council ot Constance, both in his official 
capacity and as mandatary of Henry V., whose 
confessor and private secretary he was from 1413 
to 1422. He was an important figure in Henry's 
measures against the Lollards, as in the trials of 
Lord Cobham (1413) and William Sartor (1423). 
Ue visited Lithuania in I4lt) to reconcile King 
Jagello with the grand master of the Teutonic 
Knights, and in 1431 accompanied Heniy VI. to 
his coronation in France. 

Although Netter is said to have written com- 
mentaries on several ot the works of Aristotle, as 
well as Saper scntcidioB libri quatuor and Super 
omnes B&tiorum libroi poetilla gchotastica, but two 
of his books are extant — DoclHnale antiquUalian 
fidei ecrUniiE calholicm (3 vols., Paris, 1521-32; 4th 
ed., by T. B. BlanchiotU, Venice, 1767-59) and 
Fasriruli ^izaniorum Magixtri Johannit Wviif cum 
trUiro (ed. W. W. Shirley, No, 5 of RolU Series. 
Ijindon, 1858). The former ot these was composed 
between about 1415 and 1429, and, like the second. 




which ia a collection of documente for the history of 
Vyclif and the Lollards, was written to coutra- 
Tene WycUfite tenets. Wyciit'a appeal to Scrip- 
ture is accepted by Netter with the proviso that 
tfae externa be that of the early Fathers, especially 
•B individual ioterpret^ttioD is only too often used 
to afford a basis tor here^. If, moreover, aa in 
Wyclif's case, only the authority of Christ be rec- 
□gnuwd, then Christ, the head, is severed from hia 
body, the Church; and while the authority of a 
■ingle Father may be doubted, the conaensuB of 
pTscticaJly nil must be respected. And, more than 
this, the uBoges of the Church, her " living faith," 
give light when written sources fail or disagree. 
Again, since canonical authority was first given the 
Bible by the Church, and since the law of Christ 
bad in those books reached perfection, therefore 
neither doubtful books nor strange doctrines could 
be accepted or taught either by the Church or by 
individuals. The strange doctrines of Wyclif must 
Mcordingly be rejected. 

Proceeding from strict Roman Catholic patristic 
ejcegesia, but relatively ignoring scholasticism, and 
in complete harmony with the theological position 
of his period, Nettcr refuted in detail the teachings 
of Wyclif, nith whose writings he shows himself 
thoroughly acquainted, supporting his arguments 
by the Bible and citations from the Fathers and 
idder theologians and achoohnen. His special ob- 
jects of attack are Wyclif's predestination, which 
leadi to determinism and pantheism, besides sub- 
verting freedom and service; and hia anthropology 
and Christdogy. The first book of the DiKtrinale 
ia thus devoted primarily lo theological doctrines; 
but Netter's main interests being practical, the 
Kcond book treats of the Church, the third of the 
perfected in reli^on, the fourth of mendicancy, the 
fifth of the sacraments, and the sixth of the Sacrs' 
mentals (q.v.). In the second book the primacy of 
Peter and of the pope is demonstrated; and Wyclif's 
doctnne that the Church is " the totality of the 
predestined "ia rejected. In the third book the "re- 
ligion of those made perfect " is defended by the ex- 
■fflidee of the Scthites, the Rechabiles, and Samuel; 
■ad in the fourth mendicancy is based on the in- 
twhw of Christ with the woman of Samaria and 
fli« teaching of the aposUea. In the fifth book 
WyeBf i« branded as despiaing the sacraments, and 
adoration of the host and transubstantiation are 
■ealously defended. LHraquislic tendencies &n 
condemned, for it the " all " of Matt. wtvi. 27 were 
rigidly interpreted, it would imply that even chil- 
dren and heinous sinners should receive the cup. 
The scholastic concept of " character," disposing 
the soul to fulfil the commandments of God and to 
receive sacraciental grace, is maintained regarding 
baptisn and declared to be found in Eph. iv. and 
the Fathers. The primitive nature of the hier- 
anchy is defended, as are the usual doctrines ot 
auricular confession and the " Power of the Keys " 
(q.v.). The distinction between mortal and venial 
nns Ls held to be implieil in the Bible, as in tlie ac- 
count of Cain ; and venial sins are declared to be 
CtHmnitled through ignorance and frailty, but 
mortal sins through contempt. The concluding 
book, treating in detail of sacramentals, discusses. 

among other themes, prayer, rites, the moss, inter- 
cesiiion, the veneration of saints, canonization, pil- 
grimages, and the adoration of the cross. 

(R. Seebeho.) 

BiHuoaBAPST: The moat minpleM liCa Ea prefixed tfl Blaaehi- 
atti'a ed, of tbe work noted in the text, i., ii.-xvii. Other 
maleru] is found io: J. Ldand. Commealani dr u-nptnri- 
&u BHIaTmicif. od. A. HbII. pp. 43S-441, Oitord, 1709; 
Coame de ViUien de BuDte-Eliennr. BAlia Carmdilana. 
ii. 8a*-S20, S-13-842. Coaiiult also DNB. il. 231-234. 

HETTLETOB, ASAHEL: American Congrega- 
tionalist and revivalist; b. at North Killiiigworth, 
Conn., Apr. 21, 1783; d. at East Windsor, Conn., 
May 16, 1844. He graduated at Yale in 1809; and, 
after studying theology, was licensed in 1611, and 
ordained as an evangelist in 1S12. From 1812 to 
1S22 he was active aa an evangelist in Massachu- 
setts, Connecticut, and New York. In 1827 he 
went to Virginia tor bis health, returning in 1829. 
He held meetings in Coimectlcut and New York 
City b 1830-31, and visited Great Britain in 1831. 
In 1833 he was appointed professor of pastoral 
theology in the recently established theological in- 
stitute of East Windsor (now Hartford Seminary), 
but though be declined, yet he settled there and 
occasionally lectured to the students. He was a 
powerful preacher, and large accesaiona to the 
church resulted from his cfforlfi, which were strongly 
doctrinal and Cal\inistic. He was regarded as the 
representative of the conservative tendency, in op- 
position to Charles G. Finney (q.v.), whose evan- 
gelistic labors aroused much criticism. He pub- 
lished Village Hymnt (1824), regarded aa one of the 
best ot American collections of hjimns. 

BiBLioaiuPBv: B. Tyler. McTnoirol Rn. A. iVdIIffan. Hitrt- 
ford, 1M4; W. B. 3pni«ue, Aniu^ ol Ihe Amervan Ptiipii, 
u. H2-flS4, New York, 18S9. 

EVAHGELICAL CHURCH OF: A free Evangelical 
church organized in 1873 in the canton of Neuchfltel, 
the object being to create a church entirely inde- 
pendent of the State. 

In origin the Independent Church of Neuchitel 
may be said to date back to the time of the Refor- 
mation. At that time the sovereigns ot the coun- 
try rernained attached to Roman Catholic ism; and 
the governor, their representative, opposed with 
all his might the powerful preikching of Farel, and 
the reformatory impulse aroused in the people by 
that preaching. But the Reformed Church was 
established in Neucbdtel without, and even in spite 
ot, the State; while in the other Swiss cantons 
the administration of the Church and that of the 
State were generally united in the hands of tiie 
political power, since the grand councils placed 
tbcmselves ut the head of the movement, and im- 
posed the Reformation on the country, even against 

The pastors of the new church, with Farel, the 
Knox of Switzerland, at their head, used to meet 
regularly in the city of Neuchfllel to discuss the 
affairs of tlieir churches. From these spontaneous 
reunions originated the body called the " Company 
of Pastors," which continued at the head of the 




church of Neuch&tel down to 1848, governing the 
church completely, independently of the State, 
and maintaining with great fidelity the preaching 
of the pure Gospel. For the material sustenance of 
the church a fund was provided, formed partly from 
old-church property, partly from private contribu- 
tions. But in 1848 the revolution which dissolved 
the relation in which the state of Neuch&tel had 
stood to Prussia since 1707 overthrew the ecclesias- 
tical sovereignty of the Company of Pastors. From 
the negotiations between that body and the new 
authorities resulted a reorganization of the church, 
according to which its administration was confided 
to a synod, composed of ecclesiastics and laymen 
chosen by the forty churches of the country. The 
synod also appointed the professors of theology, 
without any interference from the side of the State. 
The former church property was absorbed by the 
State treasury, which then was charged with the 
payment of the ecclesiastical officers. 

Under this constitution the church lived until 
about 1865. At that time a number of freethinkers 
who had acquired great influence in the circles of 
the government resolved to disrupt the stubborn 
dogmatic unity. A revision of the ecclesiastical 
law was decided upon in the grand council; and 
shortly after a new law was carried by a majority 
of seven votes. According to Art. 4 of the new 
law, every citizen of the State is by birth a member 
of the church, and has the franchise. According 
to Arts. 6 and 12 every minister is eligible to an 
office in the church, if he has a license to preach; 
and he can not be bound in advance by any meas- 
ure, regulation, or creed. Art. 17 leaves the sjmod 
no authority outside of the administration; and an 
article added during the debate transfers the ap- 
pointment of professors in theology from the synod 
to the council. This led to a debate as to the 
measures necessary under the circumstances, in 
which differences of opinion developed. 

Some thought that it was their duty to submit 
to the new law, though it was ruinous to the church, 
and to live on under the deplorable constitution, 
waiting for better times. Others thought that the 
new establishment had nothing whatever in com- 
mon with the Church founded by Christ himself, 
and insisted upon the necessity of an organization 
independent of the State. The adherents of the 
latter opinion assembled in 1873, and chaiged the 
members of the old synod who were present with 
taking the necessary measiutjs for the organization 
of the new church. The professors of the theolog- 
ical faculty were invited to open their lectures at 
the ordinary term, and under the direction of the 
synod. Out of the forty parishes of the country, 
twenty-one groups of faithful were formed, which, 
with their pastors, declared in favor of forming the 
new church. The most numerous groups con- 
tained between five and six hundred voters; others, 
however, only about thirty. A synod was elected, 
consisting of all the pastors, and three laymen for 
each pastor. A new constitution was also dravm 
up, and submitted to the churches, which adopted 
it with a unanimous vote. 

A synodical committee governs the church in 
the intervals between the sessions of the synod. 

The pastors are paid, not directly by their par- 
ishes, but from a central fund formed by vdun- 
taiy gifts. The annual budget, comprisiiig the 
maintenance of the theological faculty of four pro- 
fessors, amounts to over 110,000 francs, each pastor 
being paid from 2,500 to 2,800 francs a year. As the 
use of the church-buildings is by law guaranteed 
to all religious denominations, the independent con- 
gr^ations can use the buildings; and about one- 
half of them do so. But the others, having met 
with various impediments in the exercise of their 
right, have built their own places of worship, and 
spent for that purpose another million. These sac- 
rifices, however, are not considered a burden since 
by those sacrifices the contributors have preserved 
the preaching of the pure Gospel, not only for them- 
selves and their children, but also in the state 
church; for the government has felt compdled to 
give up the introduction of rationalism in the state 
establishment, feeling convinced that a number of 
pious persons who still cling to that institution 
would, in such a case, immediately enlist in the 
ranks of the independent church. F. GoDBTf. 

In 1906 it was conceived by a political party that 
for financial reasons the time had come to dises- 
tablish the national church of the canton, giving 
to all who care for religion the opportunity to apply 
some of the principles taught for twenty-five years 
by the independents. The motion was rejected by 
a majority of five in the grand council, but was 
again brought forward by the central commissioa 
in September of the same year. The electoral cam- 
paign which followed was marked by the admission 
of the state church that if the new motion should 
not carry, yet a new financial basis ought to be 
found for the support of their church. The popular 
vote of Jan., 1907, was against disestablishment by 
a majority of 6,679 in 23,500 votes, showing that 
free-church principles had not won. 

The statistics of 1908 show 24 parishes with 4,429 
voters, 6,140 female members, and a body of ad- 
herents of about 15,000. N. Weiss. 

Bibuoorapht: The BuUetint de Synodes; O. Godet, La 
Qiiestum eceUai€uiique de Neuehdtd, in Revue ehriUemne, 
Sept., 1873^an., 1874; C. Monvert, HieL de la fimdatian 
de rSgliae ivanoUupte neuehdteloiae indSpemdcuUe de FMat, 
Neuch&tel, 1898. 

GOTTHOLD: German Protestant; b. at Gotha 
(27 m. w. of Weimar), Germany, Apr. 10, 1807; d. 
there July 11, 1866. He was educated at the Uni- 
versity of Jena (1826-29), and after a brief resi- 
dence at Leipsic, followed by a tour of southern 
(jermany and Alsace, he became a private tutor at 
Cassel. From 1832 to 1842 he resided at Gotha as 
a private scholar, but in the latter year was ap- 
pointed teacher at the Knabenbiligerschule; he be- 
came titular conrector there in the following year, 
and in 1855 was made second rector of the garrison 
and Erfurt Vorstadtschule, while from 1860 until 
his death he was director of the Gotha BtUgerschule. 
Among his writings of theological interest are: AU- 
gemeines Lexikon der Rdigians- und chrisUichen 
KirchengeachichU fUr aUe Konfesnanen (4 vols, with 
supplement, Weimar, 1834-37); Urkunden aus der 
Reformatumszeit (Cassel, 1836); MerkwHrdige Ak- 


temluclce am der Zeii iter Reforwalvm (2 piirta, Nu- 
rembet]g, 1838); Lehrbuch der kiaorixcK-knlUcken. 
EinUitattg in das Neve Tegtament (Leipdc, 1840); 
Afnie BeHrdgt tw GeacAichte der Reformation, mU 
kiMariteH-kriHacAm AnimrkuTigen (2 vols., 1S4I); 
GtmAkAlc der Rtformatim von I5I7-I5S2 (1842); 
GeKhuAle de» evangeHtchen ProUslantimnu* in 
DevlaMand fUr denkmde und pra/emie Christen 
(2 parts, 1844-16); and Die nauptversvche zur 
Pac^fOaition der evangtUach-proUstantiachen Kirrhe 
DaOtdtUmdM von der Reformation bis auf uneere 
Tage (1S46). He also edited HandschHflliehe Ge- 
tchichle MaUhdw Raticbergers aber Luther und aeine 
Zeil (Jena, 1850) and Georg Spalatins hiOoriacher 
XachloM und Brie/e <»ith L. Preller; 1851), besidea 
eoDtuiuiiig the third edition o( W. MUnaeher's Lekr- 
btick der chrullichen Dogmengetchichle (Caasel, 1838), 

(A. ScHUMANJit-) 

: GeOuatc)^ ZoImho, July 14, 1806: ADB, 

IIEDIUHR, nei'mOn, CASPAK: Lutheran theo- 
logwi and hTimiist; b. at Brealau Sept. 14, 1648; 
d. at BreaUu Jan. 27. 1715. He was pastor at St. 
Elizabeth's, fireslau, uiBpector over all the local 
eborches and schools, and Aret professor in the two 
municipal gymnasia. He commandeU wide learn- 
ing in the Bpherea of political and natural acience, 
but in theology he accomplished little that was note- 
-wnrtby. Though unfriendly to Pietism, he was still 
characterized by deep devoutness, with some touch 
of Spener'a spirit. He was leas known through 
lus collected sennona lAcht und Reeht (Berlin, 1716; 
Leipsic, 1731) thau he was through his prayer- 
book Kern aUrr Gebete (enlaiged in 2d^th eds., 
irittenberg, 1686-93; twentjr-two iasuea down to 
faia death; new edition Eisleben, 1882). Written 
origmally for his private use, it became expanded 
into a comprehensive prayer-book. In the Evan- 
gelical Church of Germany, Neumann is even still 
better known through his thirty-nine church 
hymno, of which ten or twelve arc retained to this 
day in the state church hymnals. A few of his 
hymiu are: " Groetier Gott von alten Zeiteu," Eng. 
tnnal. by H. J. Buckoll, " God of Agea never end- 
fag "j " Herr, es iat ein Tag erechienen "; " Nun, 
bricht die finstre Nocht herein "; and " Herr, auf 
Erden muse ich leiden," Eng. transl. by Mimt Wink- 
worth, " Lord, on earth T dwell sad-hearted." There 
is, however, more poetry in Neumann's prose than 
in his hymiu. Hermann Beck. 

Bibuoobiphy: Julinn. Ripnnolaini' P- '^5: E. E. Socb. 
GfrMcAtt da KirtherUitd ti, v. 4SS sqq.. T vole., Stutlgart, 
1806-72; A. F. W. Fiscbnr, KirdiailMcr-LaiJHm. pp. 
4SB *gq- 3 vols.. Goths. 187S~7fi; ADB. xxiii. Hal iiqq. 

HEUHARE, nei'mOrk, GEORG: HymniBt; b. 
■t Langensalza (19 m. n.w. of Erfurt), Germany, 
Mar. 18, 1821; d. at Weimar (7) July 8, 1681. He 
studied jurisprudence at KSnigsberg, then at 
Weimar he became ducal librarian and recorder, 
ftod later was keeper of the archives for the Palate 
inate. He belonged to the " pompous court set " 
of poets. Some of his spiritual hymns were merito- 
tious. expreasiDg, as they did, both a strong trust 
b God that wa.s rooted in the depth of experience, 
and an intrinsic sensibility, and have remained in 
VIII.— 9 

use to the present. His most famous hymn was: 
" Wer nur den IJeben Gott ISsat walt«n " (Eng. 
transl. by Catherine Winkworth, " My God, T leave 
to thee my ways "). Hermann Beck. 

BiBLiouBAPHi^ E. E. Koch, Carhvhlt da Kirthrnlirdtt. 

iii. 410 sqq,, iv. MS sqq.. 7 vola., aiut1«srt, 1866-72; 

Juliim, Bymnoloin). PP- 79fi-7B7; ADB. iiiii. S3B «qq. 

HEUMEISTER, ERDMAHH: Lutheran theolo- 
gian and hymnist; b. at Uchteritz near Weisaen- 
fela (20 m. s.w. of Leipsic) May 12, 1671; d. at 
Hamburg Aug. 18, 1756. He studied at Schul- 
pforta and Leipaic, and after transient academic oc- 
cupation entered the ministry, becoming pastor at 
St. Jamea' Church in Hamburg in 1715. He waa a 
vehement antagonist of Pietism, and took the field 
against Spener himself, and afterward against Zin- 
lendorf. The influence he bad with his contem- 
poraries came through tiia ascetic writings and his 
hytmiB. Of the former mention may be made of 
his manual for communion: Der Zagang tarn Gna- 
denstuld Jem Chrieti (Weissenfels, 1703 and often); 
Doe Aufheben heUiger Hande ru GoU {2d ed., Ham- 
burg, 1726); and Das GoU Buchemie und von Oott 
iebende Herz (Hamburg, 1731). He wrote many 
hymns of worth, not a few of which have survived 
to this day, among wiiich may be named " Jesu, 
grosser Wundcrsttm," Eng. tranal. by E. CroDen- 
wett, " JesusI great and wondrous star"; and 
"Jesus nimmt die Sunder ani " often translated 
into English, e.g., by Mrs. Bcvan, "Sinners Jesus 
will receive." He was also the creator of the Church 
cantata, J. S. Bach, in particular, composed the 
music for seven of his cantatas. 

Heruann Beck. 

BiBUOoKAi-ar; Julian. Hgmnoloau. PP- 7fl7-7B8; E. E. 
Koch, OrteJiiclih da Kirrlimlinit. v, 371, 7 vols., Stutt- 
gart, 1806-72: ADB. ndii. 64a sqq. 

IIEUTRL See Fbancis. Saint, or Assisi, and 
THE Fhancmcan Obder, HI, I 7. 

MEVIB, ALFRED: Presbyterian; b. at Ship- 
pensburg. Pa., Mar, 14, 1816; d at Lancaster, Pa., 
Sept, 2, 1890. He graduated from Jefferson Col- 
lege, Caiionaburg, Pa., 1836, and from the Wedtem 
Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa., 183B; waa 
pastor of the Cedar Grove Church, Pa., 1840-45; 
of the German Reformed Church, Chambersburg, 
Pa., 1845-52; of the Second Presbyterian Church, 
Lancaster, Pa., 1852-57; and of the Alexander 
Church, Philadelphia, 1857-61; he waa also lec- 
turer in the National School of Oratory, Philadel- 
phia, 1878-80. Among his works are: Churches of 
tlie Valley; or, An Historical Sketch of the Preaby- 
(ertan CongregaHong of Cumberland and Franklin 
Countiea in Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1852); 
Guide to the OracUs (Lancaster, 1857), reissued as 
The Book Opened; Analysis of the Bible (Philadel- 
phia, 186it); The Age Question: or, A Plea /or 
Christian Union (1868); Popular ETpositor: Gos- 
pel and Acts (1872); NoUs, Exegetical, Practical 
and Devotiowd, on Exodus (,1873); ParabUs of Jesus 
(1881); THumph of Truth: or, Jesus the Lighl and 
Life of the World (1881); Encyctopirdia of the Pres- 
byterian Church in the United States of America 


New Bnffland Theology 



NEVIN, EDWIN HENRY: PrcBbyterian; b. at 
Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Pa., May 9, 
1814; d. at Philadelphia July 2, 1889. He was 
graduated at Jefferson College, Canonsburg, Pa., 
1833, and at Princeton Theological Seminary, 1836; 
became pastor at Portsmouth, O., 1837; president 
of Franklin College, New Athens, O., 1841; pastor 
at Mount Vernon, O., 1845; of the Plymouth Con- 
gregational Church at Cleveland, C, 1851; Lan- 
caster, Pa., 1855; in Philadelphia (First Reformed), 
1870; retired from the pastorate 1875, and joined 
the Central Presbytery of Philadelphia. He is the 
author of numerous hymns, perhaps the best known 
being " Always with us, always with us." He was 
also the author of Man of Faith (Boston, 1858); 
The City of God (Lancaster, Pa., 1868); The Minis- 
ter's Haruibook (Philadelphia, 1872); Thoughts about 
Christ (1882). He was one of the editors of History 
of all Religious Denominations (1872). 

Bibuooraphy: S. W. Duffield, English Hymtu, pp. 28-29, 
New York, 1886; Julian, Hymnalooy, p. 799. 

man); b. near Strasburg, Pa., Feb. 20, 1803; d. at 
Lancaster, Pa., June 6, 1886. He graduated from 
Union College in 1821; and from Princeton Theo- 
logical Seminary in 1826, where he taught Hebrew, 
1826-28; he was stated supply at Big Spring, Pa., 
in 1829; professor of Hebrew and Biblical litera^ 
ture in the Western Theological Seminary, 1829- 
1840; then professor of theology at Mercersburg 
Theological Seminary, 1840-53; president of Mar- 
shall College, Mercersburg, Pa., 1841-53; professor 
of esthetics and history in Franklin and Marshall 
College, Lancaster, Pa., 1861-66; and president 
1866-76, then professor, at the same college, of 
mental and moral philosophy, 1868-76. In 1876 
he retired to private life at Caernarvon Place, near 
Lancaster, Pa. He was one of the founders of the 
Mcrcersbuig Theology (q.v.). He edited the Mer- 

cersburg Review, 1849-53, writing the largest part 
of its contents. He published A Summary of Bib- 
lical Antiquities; Compiled for the Use of Sunday 
School Teachers (Philadelphia, 1828; revised 1830); 
The Anxious Bench (Chambersburg, Pa., 1843); 
The Mystical Presence; or a Vindication of the Re- 
formed or Calvinistic Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist 
(Philadelphia, 1846); History and Oenius of the 
Heidelberg Catechism (Chambersburg, 1847); AnU^ 
Christ; or the Spirii of Sect and Schism (New York, 

Bibuographt: T. Appd. Life and Work of John WHUamr 
mm Nevin, New York, 1890. 

sionary; b. near Ovid, Seneca Co., N. Y., liar. 4, 
1829; d. at Chefoo, North China, Oct. 19, 1893. 
He was educated at Union College, Schenectady, 
1845-47, and Princeton Theological Seminary, 
1850-53. In the latter year he was ordained, ac- 
cepted as a missionary by the Presbyterian Board, 
and assigned to Ningpo, China. He labored at this 
post 1854-59; at the mission center of Hang-chow, 
1859, where he was the first to find a footing; and 
in 1859-61 sojourned in Japan, preparing a " Com- 
pendium of Theology " for Chinese students. On 
his return he removed to the Shantung district, 
North China, serving at Tung-chow, 1861-64; and 
at Chefoo, 1871-93, where at his death he was 
occupied with a translation of part of the Bible. 
He wrote China and the Chinese (New York, 1869), 
and Demon Possession and Allied Themes (1895). 

Bibuographt: Mra. H. S. C. NeviuB, Lift of John Lunngston 
Nevius, New York, 1895. 

neous Religious Bodies, 20. 


Methodists, IV., 9. 

I. Definition and Characterisation. 
II. Preliminary ConditionB. 

The Period of Settlement in 

America. 1620-60 ($1). 
The Period of Decline, 1660-1726 
III. The Founders. 
1. Jonathan Edwards the Elder. 
His Fundamental Position (( 1)> 
His Doctrine of the Will (f 2). 
Original Sin and Virtue ($3). 


2. Edwarda' Successors, Bellamy and 
IV. The Development. 

1. The Younger Edwards to Samud 

Doctrine of the Atonement (I 1). 
Regeneration ($2). 

2. The Great Controveraies. 
The Universalist Controveray 

(J 1). 
The Unitarian Controversy (f 2). 

I. Definition and Characterization: New Eng- 
land theology, in the technical sense of these words, 
designates a special school of theology which grew 
up among the Congrcgationalists of New England, 
originating in the year 1734, when Jonathan Ed- 
wards (q.v.) began his constructive theological 
work, culminating a little before the Civil War, de- 
clining aften^ards, and rapidly disappearing after 
the year 1880. During this period it had l>ecome 
the dominant school among Congregationalists, had 
led to a division among Presbyterians, resulting in 
the creation of a new denomination, the New School 
Presbyterian (1838-69), had founded all the theo- 
logical seminaries of the Congregationalists and I 

The Unitarian Poeitaoii and the 

Answer (| 3). 
The Separation oi the Unitexiane 

V. The Ripened Product. 
Tayloriam (| 1). 
Buahnell, Smith, and Finney 

Edwarda Amasa Paric (| 3). 
Summary of Park'a Thedogy (| 4). 
VI. The CoUapae of the SchooL 

several of the Presbsrterians, had furnished the vital 
forces from which had sprung the American Board 
of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, had estab- 
lished a series of colleges from Amherst in the East 
to Pacific University in the West, and led in a great 
variety of practical efforts for the extension of the 
kingdom of Christ. It may be formally defined as 
the Calvinism of Westminister and Dort modified by 
a more ethical conception of God, by a new empha- 
sis upon the liberty, ability, and responsibility (A 
man, by the restriction of moral quality to action 
in distinction from nature, and by the theory that 
the constitutive principle of virtue is benevolence. 
This article sketches its history geneUcally, details 




New Bnffland Theology 

as to the individiial men being remitted to the 
qpeelal artkleB upon them. 

n. Preliminary Conditions: The emigrants to 
New En^and were, in England, Calvinistic Puri- 
tans. In Holland, John Robinson (q.v.) had come 
in contact with the Arminians, and luid taken sides 
them. Arminianism was a recoil from the 
extreme positions of a scholastic Cal- 
I. The vinism, but as it had no better psychol- 

Period of ogy or philosophy by which to estab- 

Settlemeat lish its objections than Calvinism had 
in America, developed, it was imable to obtain the 

1620-69. general assent of minds of the first 
rank which had been thoroughly 
trained in the old system. At a disputation which 
was hdd in the University of Leyden in 1613, 
Robinson had appeared for the Calvinistic party, 
and subsequently published a Defence of the Doo- 
trine Propounded by the Synod of Dort (Leyden, 
1624). Two years after the Westminster Confes- 
sion (see Westminster Standards) had been pre- 
pared in England it was adopted in New England 
(1648) as the general theological standard of the 
new churches. The type of theology thus fixed re- 
mained unchanged during this period, the two the- 
dogicai events which occurred exercising no per- 
ceptible influence upon it. The first of these was 
the Antinomian controversy, which was stirred up 
by the teachings of Mrs. Ann Hutchinson in Bos- 
ton, and which was brought to an end by the Synod 
of 1637 and subsequent civil action (see Antino- 


Mrs. Hutchinson taught that the evidence of justi- 
fication was the immediate revelation of the in- 
dwelling Spirit, and was independent of sanctifica- 
tion; and this was no sooner fully understood than 
it was rejected. The second event was the publica- 
tion in 1650 of a treatise upon The MerUorioua Price 
of our Redemption by William Pynchon (q.v.), the 
leading personality at Springfield, and a la3rman. 
I^nchon's principal contention was against the idea 
that Christ suffered the pains of hell, but he also 
rejected the imputation of our sins to (Christ and 
of Christ's merits to us, making justification to be 
forgiveness, and presenting for a positive theory of 
Uie atonement the thought that Christ's obedience 
more highly pleased God than our sins displeased 
him, thus repeating substantially the theory of 
Anselm. The book met with a stem reception, be- 
ing publicly burned by order of the General Court, 
and then, by order of the same body, refuted by 
John Norton (q.v.) who piirsued quite the line of 
the standard orthodoxy. And thus the book fell 
into obscurity witliout leaving a trace of its influ- 
ence. But meantime this Westminster theology of 
the New England Fathers was working out its nat- 
ural results. It was characteristic of Calvinism to 
lay so much stress upon the sovereignty of God as 
to neglect the freedom of man. The tone of mind 
in New England was unphiloeophic. The sover- 
eignty of God was the great doctrine of theology 
in the popular estimation. Man was abased that 
God might be exalted; and hence the common 
preaching dwelt so much upon man's helplessness 
that the function of the pulpit to rouse the people 
to repentance and the exercise of vigorous faith 

was suspended, if not destroyed. Man's activity 
was so lost sight of in the contemplation of God's 
agency that faith was represented as something to 
be waited for as a mysterious gift from on high. 
It could not be understood as primarily an act of 
the will, for the will itself had not been separated 
from the other faculties of the mind so that theol- 
ogy could ascribe to it any independent activities. 
As was natural, a paralysis spread over the churches. 
Conversions were rare, and the second generation 
of New England was largely unconverted, and even 
failed to bring their children to baptism. The re- 
sults were alarm and that effort to remedy the evil 
by outward means which was the first event with 
which the next period opens, the " Half- Way Cove- 
nant " (q.v.) ; but the effort was vain. 

The religious paralysis continued, degeneration 
of the public character followed, indifference to re- 
ligion increased, and immorality began to abound. 
Things grew so bad that in 1679 a " Reforming 
Synod " was called in Boston. The account given 
by the synod of the state of morals is 
3. The so dark that some exaggeration must 
Period of be suspected. But the positive sins 
Decline, mentioned, the increase of profanity, 
1660-1726. intemperance, and licentiousness, show 
that there was rising about the Church 
a community which the Church was not making its 
own. The causes of this decline were not all theo- 
logical, for the roughness of frontier life, the perils 
and losses of the Indian wars, the deprivation of 
the privileges of education which the fathers had 
enjoyed in England, and even the effect in the new 
country of such untoward events in the old as the 
restoration of the Stuarts, are to be considered. 
But the theological currents of the times had con- 
tributed their part. Latitudinarianism and that 
form of Arminianism which was represented by 
Tillotson, Garke, Whitby, Taylor, and others, 
whose writings were freely read in New England, 
helped to loosen the hold of conviction upon the 
minds of men, producing a state of indecision and 
inactivity, accompanied by some new sense of the 
dignity of human nature, without performing any 
deep and thorough work of theological reconstruc- 
tion. The tide soon set toward Arminiamsm; the 
Arminian theories were more or less accepted; the 
doctrine of the new birth which, in the forms of a 
theology of dependence upon a sovereign God, was 
inconsistent with the new feeling of freedom which 
was stirring in the thought of the times, was for- 
gotten or denied; under the operation of the Half- 
Way Covenant and the theory of Solomon Stod- 
dard (q.v.) that the conmiunion should be opened 
to unbelievers as a converting ordinance, vital piety 
was neglected for an outward piety of good works; 
and thus not only the Calvinistic theology, but 
even the religious life of New England was endan- 
gered. An Increase Mather might still be found 
to preach powerful revival sermons and to protest 
against destructive innovations, but protest was rare 
and ineffectual. New England was in a bad way. 
The Puritan experiment of founding a pure church 
to sustain and extend vital piety and pure doctrine 
from generation to generation was near utter failiue. 
Who would or could save it? 

K«w England Thaolonr 



in. The Founders. — 1. Jonathan Edwards the 
Elder: By birth and early training belonging to 
the strictest circles of the old theology, and by 
nature and religious experience inclined to the 
heartiest acceptance of the great cen- 
1. His Pnn- tra^ doctrine of Calvinism, the sover- 

damental eignty of God, Jonathan Edwards the 

Position. Elder (q.v.) was essentially a defender 
of the old, with little sympathetic ap- 
preciation of the new thought which was struggling 
for expression. Much less was his work a new 
movement, beginning at a new point, and produc- 
ing a theology which by its very radicalness was 
able to replace the old with something destined to 
mark one of the great advances of the human spirit. 
The times were not ripe for any such work. The 
principle of authority was still dominant in the 
Protestant world. The Deists had shaken it off from 
their own minds, but they had made no permanent 
impression upon their times. The new views had 
not succeeded in establishing themselves by such 
an interpretation of the Scriptures as should render 
it necessary for the theologian to admit that they 
were favored by revelation, much less that they 
were its evident meaning. Calvinism still seemed 
to have the Scriptures in its favor; and, upon the 
generally accepted principles of the day, to say this 
was to pronounce the doom of Arminianism. Ed- 
wards accordingly set himself, first for his own peo- 
ple, and then for the community at laige, to the task 
of overcoming Arminianism, and he performed it 
by presenting the old theology afresh, but in such a 
form sls he believed would carry the assent of his 
generation. He formed the distinct purpose of 
proving every proposition he advanced with so co- 
gent logic that every consistent thinker should be 
compelled to accept it. His premises were Scrip- 
tural, but his method was purely rational, however 
it may seem now and then to clothe itself in the 
form of consecutive interpretation; and by this he 
introduced a new force into American theology. It 
was to prove at last more powerful than any other 
element of this theology. He began his work by 
preaching that series of sermons upon justification 
by faith which led to his first revival in 1734. It 
may be said that there is nothing new in these ser- 
mons. They present the old doctrine in the old 
formulas, but with the intensity of a man who had 
an independent grasp upon the thought he was ur- 
ging. But there was something in the earnestness 
of the preacher, something in his exaltation of the 
work of Christ, which evoked action, and thus in- 
troduced a new element into the religious life of New 
England. It became natural to look for conversion 
as the result of preaching, and so the doctrine of the 
new birth was reintroduced into New England as a 
living idea, and soon became a controlling theologi- 
cal principle. By logical necessity the next step was 
the reerection of the fact of the new birth as the 
indispensable condition of church-membership, the 
original peculiarity of the New England churches. 
Ekiwards took it, and it led to his dismissal from 
his parish. 

In the retirement of Stockbridge the work went 
on. Driven now by a mental necessity, he went 
into a more fundamental refutation of Arminian- 

ism. He attacked it in his most famous treatise, 
that upon the Freedom of the Will, The book is not 

that of an investigator, or even that of 

8. His <^ impartial judge. It is the woric of 

3>ootrine an advocate. Edwards was firmly 

of the WilL fixed upon the basis of the Calvinistic 

doctrine of the divine sovereignty, 
which he viewed as a doctrine not only glorious but 
unspeakably sweet and precious. He perceived the 
necessity of philosophical determinism to that con- 
ception of the divine government which he had 
formed, and it was, therefore, determinism which 
he embraced and advocated. He believed the 
Arminian position to be thoroughly opposed to 
that sound philosophy which everybody accepted 
and which was already before the world in the 
works of John Locke. All that was necessaiy to 
banish it from the earth was elaborately to exhibit 
this fact. He did not condescend to notice Locke's 
own suggestion of a threefold division of the mind, 
whereby the will obtained a separation from the 
other faculties which seemed to suggest its inde- 
pendent operation. He reverted to the standard 
twofold division which had come down from Cal- 
vin, and, simply taking Locke's theory, as it was 
presented in the Essay concerning Human Under- 
standing, without the addition of a single impor- 
tant element or even aigument, he set it forth in 
contrast with Arminianism, and exposed Arminian- 
ism in the light of it, till for himself and the major- 
ity of his age there was no reply to be made. In- 
deed, grant him his postulate, and there is no 
answer. This postulate is that the law of causation 
reigns in the intellectual world as completely as it 
does in the natural. There can be no such thing as 
an imcaused event. Hence the will b moved by 
causes, and these are the motives which operate 
upon it. The will always is as the greatest apparent 
good. Freedom consists in the power to do what 
the will has chosen. There is no liberty of the will 
apart from this. The self-determination of the 
Arminians is an impossible hypothesis. A self- 
determined volition is an uncaused event, an im- 
possibility, or it is caused by some previous action 
of the will. But if a previous action of the will de- 
termining it is necessary to constitute it free, then 
an action still previous is necessary to make that 
act free, or else it, being unfree, can not give rise to 
a free act, and bo on ad infinitum. This is his reduc- 
tion of his adversaries' position to absurdity, re- 
peatedly employed in his work. The Arminians 
were more nearly correct upon the main point than 
Edwards was; and yet they had so mingled their 
real advance with errors of excess in the direction of 
other anthropological doctrines that they seemed as 
much to ignore the agency of God in man's religious 
life as the Calvinists ignored that of man. In spite 
of his main position, which would have reduced man 
to a mere machine, Edwards gave to him a real ac- 
tivity, and laid great emphasis upon the fact that 
moral agency consists in choosing. He also intro- 
duced a distinction between natural and moral abil- 
ity, which, though fallacious, as he stated it, was 
seized upon by his successors and made the basis of 
effective preaching. But, faulty as was the book in 
these respects, it was a marvel of acuteness in dia- 



New England Thaolory 

lectie. So thorough-going and minute discussion of 
this theme had never yet been had. It made the 
greatest sensation in the literary world and remains 
to this day the main support of Edwards' literary 
fame as one of the greatest of Americans. 

But Edwards' strictly theological work did not 
stop here. In his treatise upon Original Sin he ad- 
vanced a step by laying down the principle that all 
sin is voluntary. In this book he becomes the in- 
vestigator and innovator. However 
m*^*^* ^®^®c^^® ^ definition of the word vol- 
Virtoe. ^^^A'y i3ught be, sin consisted in choos- 
ing and choosing wrongly. While re- 
taining the doctrine of original sin, and thus of 
man's connection with Adam, he thought it nece»- 
saiy to explain it in such a way as to give room for 
this new principle, which he did by substituting 
mediate for immediate imputation, teaching that 
we must consent to Adam's sio by voluntarily sin- 
ning before his sin can be imputed to us. This idea 
went down to his successors, as well as the idea of 
connection with Adam by a " divine constitution," 
under which idea Edwards taught a certain identity 
of all men with Adam, spending some eneigy upon 
a discussion of personal identity and the possibil- 
ity of embracing Adam and his descendants in such 
identity. This treatise is, then, no mere piece of 
reaction. Edwards learns as he writes. What he 
fyppoees are for the most part real errors. He says 
nothing about other principles of Taylor's (whose 
work he is reviewing) which were later to form a 
large part of the working materials of the school. 
And he has put the theology more markedly upon 
an ethical basis by making corruption of nature an 
ethical corruption, consisting principally in dep- 
rivation of the presence of the Holy Spirit — noth- 
ing physical, nothing merely mysterious. The 
greatest constructive work of Edwards' life, how- 
ever, was done in a little treatise, commonly left 
unmentioned, the Nature of Virtue, in which he 
arrives at the principle that benevolence is the con- 
stitutive element of true virtue. The idea is not 
original with him, but is derived from Hutcheson 
and Cumberland. But Edwards rises at once upon 
a plane of rational intuition upon which his prede- 
cessors had no footing. Indeed, he does not so 
much prove his position as unfold it. And thus be- 
ginning with the idea of harmony, which is the 
ideal condition of the universe, he proceeds at once 
to bring the idea of virtue into connection ifvith it; 
and when that connection is established, his work 
is done. Virtue, he teaches, is something beautiful, 
or some kind of beauty. It is a moral kind of 
beauty, one belonging to the disposition and will. 
Nor is it any " particular " beauty, or beauty in a 
limited sphere, but one which is still beautiful when 
viewed in the most comprehensive manner. Now, 
"beauty does not consist in discord and dissent, 
but in consent and agreement; and if every intel- 
ligent being is in some way related to being in gen- 
eral, and is a part of the imiversal system of exist- 
ence, and so stands in connection with the whole, 
what can its general and true beauty be but its 
union and consent with the great whole? " That is 
substantially the whole argument. Virtue is beauty, 
and beauty is harmony. Virtue, then, is harmony, 

or the choice of harmony. It is agreement to be- 
ing, or consent to being. This being is general be- 
ing, and hence virtue is love to being in general, or 
disinterested benevolence. A volition is virtuous 
when it is the exemplification of such benevolence; 
an act is virtuous when it rests upon the motive of 
love. Both Edwards and his school thought their 
conception to be identical with that of Jesus when 
he said that the whole law hung on the two com- 
mandments. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with 
all thy heart; and thy neighbor as thyself. This 
theory is the central root from which grew most 
that was distinctive of New England theology, and 
may be said to be that theology in germ; and yet 
its importance was not perceived by its originator, 
nor did he make any recognizable application of it 
to the system. 

Thus Edwards revivified the doctrine of the new 
birth, introduced the work upon the theory of the 
will which was to occupy so much of the strength 
of his successors, made one application of it in the 
way of an improvement in the doctrine of imputa- 
tion, and propounded the theory of virtue. These 
were his contributions of material to the New Eng- 
land school; but his theological work was far wider 
than this. Through his personal contact with a 
number of young minds in their formative period 
he did much to instil his spirit, the spirit of un- 
fettered, rational inquiry, into the next generation 
of ministers, and to form a " school." Among those 
who resorted to his house to study theology with 
him for a longer or a shorter time were especially 
two, who remained his intimate friends and advi- 
sers throughout his life, Joseph Bellamy and Samuel 
Hopkins (qq.v.; see also Hopkinsianism). 

8. Edwards' Snooessors, Bellamy and Hopkins: 
Bellamy fully adopted Edwards' theory of virtue, 
and made extensive applications of it in his prin« 
cipal work, True Rdigian Delineated (Boston, 1750). 
This work defines religion as consisting in conform- 
ity to the law of God and compliance with the Gos- 
pel of Christ. The law is fulfilled by love. Under 
the Gospel, Bellamy considers the principal points 
of theology, and here the effects of Edwards' influ- 
ence begin to appear. Ability is emphasized, and 
men are exhorted to immediate repentance, as a 
thing wholly within their powers. Their inability is 
recognized, but it is an inability arising from a want 
of a good disposition, and therefore culpable. '* The 
more imable to love God we are," he says, " the more 
are we to blame." Under original sin he says that 
" our corruptions " are " free, spontaneous inclina- 
tions." Election is founded upon God's goodness. 
In the doctrine of the atonement, Bellamy made 
the transition for the school from the Calvinistic 
theory that the sufferings of Christ were a satisfac- 
tion to justice, rendered to God as the offended 
party, to the Grotian theory that they are a penal 
example, and that God in this matter is to be con- 
sidered as a moral governor. He performed a very 
great service also in discussing the Wisdom of God 
in the Permiaeion of Sin (1758), justifying it on the 
ground that evil is the necessary means of the great- 
est good. And, above all, he so preached the Gos- 
pel, under the influence of the new conceptions, as 
to stir men powerfully to spiritual activity, and to 

N«w Xnffland Thaoloffy 



do much to enlarge the influence of the revivals 
which had begun under Edwards. Hopkins began 
his career in a storm of opposition called out by his 
adherence to high Calvinism. His first published 
work was entitled Sin through the Divine Inierposir- 
Hon an Advantage to the Universe (1759). The title 
was enough for most readers. It occupied substan- 
tially the position of Bellamy. More serious was 
the opposition to his views upon conversion and 
regeneration. Over against this new theology of 
the new birth was a tendency which sought to win 
men to God by presenting something less radical 
than an entire, immediate, and voluntary surren- 
der to God as the condition of the divine accept- 
ance. Mayhew, Mills, Hart, and Hemmenway rep- 
resent various forms of this opposition, which was 
met by Hopkins in a series of tracts. One of them, 
which went to the root of the opposition, was the 
Inquiry into the Nature of True Holiness (1773), 
which presented the theory of Edwards, but in an 
original way, and modified it by making all sin to 
consist in selfishness, as all holiness in benevo- 
lence. By all this work Hopkins was finally brought 
to the preparation of his System (1793). It was the 
first system of theology prepared in New England 
which could be called original; but it followed quite 
strictly the conventional selection and arrange- 
ment of topics. The modifying elements are Ed- 
wardsean, that moral agency consists in choice, that 
man possesses true ability to repent, that love is the 
essence of virtue. Hopkins advances upon Ed- 
wards in the emphasis which he lays upon the real 
freedom of man. He grounds his doctrine of the 
divine decrees distinctly upon the divine love. He 
defends the freedom of men under the decree by 
asserting that the decree includes freedom, though 
he does not say how. He really fails to deliver 
himself from the supralapsarianism of his predeces- 
sors. The doctrine of sin he improves by teaching 
that " there is, strictly speaking, no other sin but 
actual sin." And upon the atonement, he teaches 
the Grotian theory distinctly as to what is accom- 
plished by the sufferings of Christ, but holds that 
there is another part of Christ's work, which he ac- 
complished by his obedience. This is, however, not 
imputed to believers, as in the old theology, but by 
a merit of congruity Christ procures the gift of the 
Holy Spirit for believers, by whom they are sancti- 
fied and made meet to receive eternal life. Thus 
the new ideas have begun to work; and thus there 
has appeared before the second century of Amer- 
ican life has closed a system which, for compre- 
hensiveness, thoroughness, high tone, power of 
reasoning, independence, ethical and spiritual value, 
and solid contributions to the advancing school, 
deserves to be called a great work. 

IV. The Development — 1. The Tounflrer Ed- 
wards to Samnel Harris; Up to this point the new 
theology had been wrought out by patient thinkers 
in the retirement of quiet studies, but their results 
had commonly been produced in reply to some disr 
tinct call, some error which had arisen, some need 
which had been felt. This continued to be the 
case; and the development of the school was always 
conditioned by controversy. The doctrine of the 
atonement was no exception. There arrived in 

America in 1770 an English UniveiBalist, John Mur- 
ray (q.v.), who began to advocate universal salva- 
tion upon the basis of the theory of 
^- ^^^^^?^* James ReUy (q.v.), of London, which 
Atlmement. ^® called " union." It was nothing 
'but the old Calvinism of satisfaction 
and imputation plus the proposition that Chriot 
died for all. Relly concluded that Christ's merits 
were imputed to all, and therefore that all were 
saved. This conclusion could not be accepted by 
the New England divines. Their views upon the 
subject of the future had been settled by long con- 
sideration. But the logic of the Universalist argu- 
ment was good, and hence the trouble must lie in 
the premises. It could not lie in the proposition that 
Christ died for all. Bellamy had shown this. It 
must therefore lie in the proposition that Christ's 
merits are imputed to us. Tlie Grotian theory of 
the atonement had already been introduced into 
the New England thinking on account of its closer 
agreement with the theory of virtue, and the idea 
was already familiar that God does not act in the 
matter of sin as the offended party, chiefly con- 
cerned in the satisfaction of his own attribute of 
justice, and that the sufferings of Christ are not 
the payment of the sinners' debt but a penal exam- 
ple, opening the way for the free exercise of God's 
merciful love of men. Following this suggestion, a 
group of thinkers in Connecticut, with Stephen 
West of Stockbridge (q.v.), set forth almost simul- 
taneously the New England theory of the atone- 
ment as the answer of New England to Universal- 
ism. Jonathan Edwards the Yoimger (q.v.) was 
the chief of these, and his sermons at New Haven 
in 1785 are to be regarded as its first adequate pres- 
entation. As presented by Grotius, the theory was 
legal in its forms and without the ideal side. That 
ideal was given by the Edwardsean theory of virtue. 
God's government rests upon his character, and 
that character is love. Love puts men under a 
moral government, and controls them by motives. 
It prescribes just penalties for disobedience; but 
these will not be exacted simply because God is 
just. There is no virtue in an act of justice apart 
from love. Hence God will act from love — ^that is, 
from a regard for the general good of the universe. 
His character must be shielded, his law maintained, 
because love to men demands all this. But if this 
can be done, authority maintained, sinners for- 
given, and yet no moral influence exerted thereby 
upon the sinner calculated to result in his hurt, love 
demands that it shall be done. All this is actually 
effected by setting forth Christ as a penal example. 
Thus public justice, or love, is satisfied by the 
atonement, but distributive justice not; and it is 
rendered consistent with the good of the universe 
to forgive repentant sinners, but the debt of man 
is not paid nor are the merits of Christ imputed to 
him. Thus the major proposition of the Rellyan 
argument is taken away. From this time on the 
words " moral government " are found on many a 
page of the New England writers. They worked 
patiently upon the theory, developing this feature 
and that with some greater degree of fulness; and 
yet the main ideas were fully stated in the begin- 
ning. Stephen West (q.v.) brought out the relation 



N«w England Theology 

of the atonement to the character of God; Edward 
Dorr Griffin (q.v.) expatiated upon the provision 
made in it for all men, and developed more fully 
the nature of the divine government; Caleb Bui^ 
brought out the fact that the atonement is necessary 
that God should be " just to himself " by properly 
represKiting his character; and Nathaniel William 
Taylor (q.v.) restated the nature of God's moral 
government with unsurpassed fulness and clearness. 
From the time of Edwards the doctrine of regen- 
eration had excited continual attention. It was the 
doctrine of the most inmiediate practical impor- 
tance. The doctrine of the will was fundamental 

9. Tingrfin ^ ^^» *"^^ hence, the subject of the 
^j^JJJJ^" will, and particularly Edwards' great 
work, was subjected to long study, 
and passed through a development of great inter- 
est to the thinker, and of fateful significance for the 
school itself. Edwards' treatise produced so tre- 
mendous an impression that for twelve years after 
its appearance no criticism of it was sent forth. 
Then James Dana published an ExaminaHon (Bos- 
ton, 1770) which uiged with persistent force the 
position that upon Edwards' basis the only effi- 
cient causation in the universe must be that of God. 
To this work Stephen West of Stockbridge replied 
in his Moral Agency (1772), in which he followed 
Eldwards in the main, but was driven boldly to an- 
nounce the position to which Dana had tried to 
drive the Edwardseans, that moral agency consists 
in exercises (i.e., acts of the will), which are the 
action of deity as the sole true efficient cause. He 
thus reversed the motion of Hopkins in the direc- 
tion of a greater freedom than Edwards had given 
to man. Samuel West (q.v.) of New Bedford was 
stirTed by this reduction of man to a mere machine, 
to send out his Essays (1795) which were remarkable 
for first proposing in New England the division of 
the mind into three fundamental faculties, which 
he styled the ** perception, the propension, and the 
will," and taught that the mind, by divine com- 
munication, is a first cause in the same sense as God 
is himself. This revolutionary psychological pro- 
posal received no appropriate attention, for it was 
too far in advance of its times. West himself did 
not appreciate its importance nor give to it the 
weight which it ought to have received in the dis- 
cussion. He attacked the main positions of Ed- 
wards, but each by itself, strongly maintaining that 
motives are not the causes of volitions, and deny- 
ing the distinction between natural and moral abil- 
ity. He shows how Stephen West's idea of efficient 
cause makes God the only living principle in the 
universe. But the main aigument for freedom is 
consciousnees, and in this the real strength of the 
book lies. "We feel ourselves free." This work 
was replied to by the younger Edwards in a Dia- 
sartatum concerning Liberty and Necessity (1797). 
He comes stoutly to the defense of his father, 
though modifying the position of motives, making 
them occasions rather than causes of the action of 
the will. His favorite method of reply is to show 
that West really meant, and often said, just what 
Edwards said. Fimdamentally it is rather a verbal 
than a material answer. He follows Stephen West 
in making God the cause of men's volitions, and 

then banishes true efficient causation not only from 
the finite world but also from the universe, sa3ring 
that God " is no more the efficient cause of his own 
volitions than of his own existence." Thus the 
tendency of New England theology was still to 
exalt the agency of God at the expense of that of 
man. Nathanael EInmions (q.v.) closed this branch 
of the development and expressed the dependence of 
man in the extremest forms. God creates our voli- 
tions. But in Emmons the other tendency, which 
was found in Bellamy and Hopkins, also reappears, 
and the freedom of man is asserted with the most 
unflinching disdain of apparent inconsistency. Men 
are as free as if God did not act in their volitions. 
If their volitions are created, they are created free. 
But at this point of paradox and contradiction there 
appeared a book which was finally to reverse the 
current and set the Edwardsean school upon the 
road to a doctrine of true freedom, Asa Burton's Es- 
says on Some of the First Principles of Metaphy sicks 
(Portland, 1824). This service was rendered by the 
proposal of the same threefold division of the facul- 
ties of the mind which West had vainly made, now 
so presented as to make its way to general accept- 
ance. The " taste," as Burton calls the sensibility, 
is entirely separated from the will, the two faculties 
being completely distinct; but for the sake of pre- 
serving the same certainty for which Edwards 
labored, and which was supposed to be necessaiy 
to the divine sovereignty, an " infallible connec- 
tion " is declared to have been established by God 
between the taste and volition. The action of the 
taste is necessary. It is the " spring of action in 
all moral agents," and operates as the cause of voli- 
tions. Burton leaves man in the toils of Edwards' 
necessity. He has corrected one by one the minor 
errors of his predecessors — of Hopkins that free- 
dom consists in voluntariness, of Enmions that the 
mind is a chain of exercises, and that volitions are 
created by God. He has distinguished between the 
kind of necessity with which the intellect operates, 
and that by which the will is determined. But he 
has not given a true freedom. This work was per- 
formed by Nathaniel William Taylor (q.v.), who 
had come under the influence of the Scotch school 
and seized upon the new division of the mind as 
giving a neutral point in humanity, not corrupted 
by original sin, to which the Gospel could appeal. 
He made man the efficient, though not the sole 
efficient, agent of his own actions. In possessing 
agency, man has a " power to the contrary," or 
capacity of alternate choice. Motives have influ- 
ence but not causative power to produce volitions. 
But the certainty of future moral events is not re- 
linquished, though left unexplained. Charles Gran- 
dison Finney and James Harris Fairchild (qq.v.), 
at Oberlin, cleared this position of some unneces- 
sary complications. And Samuel Harris (q.v.), the 
Sir William Hamilton of the school, brought this 
development to its highest point by defining the will 
as the power of a person " to determine the end or 
objects to which he will direct his energy and the 
exertion of his energy with reference to the deter- 
mined end or object." Man " has the power of 
self-direction, self-exertion, and self-restraint." He 
distinguishes between choice as self-direction and 

N«w England Theolonr 



volition as self-exertion and self-restraint. And, 
upon the basis of consciousness, criticism, and his- 
tory, he affirms that " freedom is inherent in ration- 
ality." Edwards was wrong, he says, in considering 
the will from the point of view of efficient causation 
and forgetting that it might be exercised (in choice) 
prior to all causation. 

8. The GKreat Oontroversies: The first of these 
to take a distinct form was the Universalist, be- 
ginning, as already said, with John Murray in 1770. 

Other leaders followed him, some of 

^^J^ whom came from the Congregational 

Oontro- """istry, such as Himtington, whose 

▼ersy. pos